View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:14 pm Post subject: How to do "a posteriori" properly? |
|
|
Hey everyone!
Every now and then I've felt the urge to make a conlang that would be based on Latvian and maybe Lithuanian in some way (practically making it based on the Baltic branch). The problem is, that, since Latvian is my mothertongue, it seems quite hard for some reason. I have no idea what to do.
These are the questions I mock myself with:
- Phonology
-- What kinds of features should I keep from phonology?
-- What kinds of features should I get rid off?
-- What kinds of features should I change?
-- What kinds of features should I put in anew?
-- Should I mess with this part at all?
- Morphology
-- What kinds of features should I keep from morphology?
-- What kinds of features should I get rid off?
-- What kinds of features should I change?
-- What kinds of features should I put in anew?
- Semantics
-- What kinds of features should I keep from semantics?
-- What kinds of features should I get rid off?
-- What kinds of features should I change?
-- What kinds of features should I put in anew?
- Syntax
-- What kinds of features should I keep from syntax?
-- What kinds of features should I get rid off?
-- What kinds of features should I change?
-- What kinds of features should I put in anew?
And so on, and so on...
Is there anyone who could give me an advise of some sorts?
P.S. On a side note, I just had a weird realisation that Latvian is aglutinative up to some extent |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tolkien_Freak
Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 1231 Location: in front of my computer. always.
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AFAICR, a posteriori conlangs are conlangs that are derived from real langs through historical linguistic processes. So what you're going to be doing is sending Latvian through a series of sound changes, grammatical changes and semantic shifts. It's entirely up to you what changes you make, but if you're making a 'future Latvian' you might want to at least start out with sound changes that you're already seeing happen (for example, a future American English would have word-final /iN/ > /In/, word-final stops to /?/ and maybe lost, etc). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm not sure whether I want exactly to make a "future Latvian" (though that is also an idea)... but the fact is, that, since I've never done this, I have no idea where to start and what to do |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tolkien_Freak
Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 1231 Location: in front of my computer. always.
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You could just take Latvian and make changes ^_^
I don't honestly either, I've never done an a posteriori one either! Just start changing stuff, I guess. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aeetlrcreejl
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 Posts: 839 Location: Over yonder
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
¿What types of grammatical/sound changes are common in spoken Latvian from written Latvian? In French, for example, the 1pl pronoun "nous" only survives as an object pronoun, being replaced by the pronoun "on". These changes would then become the basis for a future Latvian. Feel free to make up some sound changes as well. As a forbus, an English-derived conlang had, IIRC, rthe sound change kr > q. Some sound changes I'd do if I were designing this conlang would be some sort of vowel shift and changing the palatalized consonants (ķ, ļ, etc). _________________ Iwocwá ĵọṭãsák.
/iwotSwa_H d`Z`Ot`~asa_Hk/
[iocwa_H d`Z`Ot`_h~a_Hk] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mm, thanks...
By "changing the palatalised consonants" you mean changing them to something else or what? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aeetlrcreejl
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 Posts: 839 Location: Over yonder
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're quite welcome.
Yes, you could change them to something else - palatalized consonants seem to be a bit unstable. You could also change the vowels next to them in a way that reflects that the consonant nearby is palatalized. _________________ Iwocwá ĵọṭãsák.
/iwotSwa_H d`Z`Ot`~asa_Hk/
[iocwa_H d`Z`Ot`_h~a_Hk] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
IF I understand you correctly, then that is pretty much the current situation in Latvian - in spesific noun groups and specific verbs, case "affixes" palatalize the previous consonant.
Noun:
vēstule (NOM.S) ---> vēstuļu (GEN.PL)
pālis (NOM.S) ---> pāļa (GEN.S)
zvaigzne (NOM.S) ---> zvaigžņu (GEN.PL)
Verb:
velt (INF) --> (es) veļu (PRS.1)
sēdēt (INF) --> (es) sēžu (PRS.1)
and it is already a historical change. At least, it is called "The historical change of consonants"
Or what did you mean?
On another note, I see some specific words, that would change their pronounciation, and therefore spelling.
*dumjš > dumš
*kaut kas > kaukas
P.S. The internet says Latvian is inflecting - my mistake |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vowel change confuses me. And the more I read about it, the more confused I get.
For instance, if there is a Chain shift, that goes a --> ɔ --> u --> i, does it mean, that there are no a's anymore? Or, if I want a's, do I have to make another shift, thus getting rid of something else?
Please, tell me what you think! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tolkien_Freak
Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 1231 Location: in front of my computer. always.
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kiri wrote: | Vowel change confuses me. And the more I read about it, the more confused I get.
For instance, if there is a Chain shift, that goes a --> ɔ --> u --> i, does it mean, that there are no a's anymore? Or, if I want a's, do I have to make another shift, thus getting rid of something else?
Please, tell me what you think! |
Yup, vowel shifts are typically chain reactions - one vowel moves, another moves to fill its place, etc. (Don't think generally that a vowel will move more than once, unless it merges and a later step involved moving the merged vowel.)
I once experimented with a vowel shift for Emitare (decided against it though) that went something like this:
Initial phonology: /i y M e 2 o a/
/M/ > /y/
/o/ > /u/
/a/ > /O/
/e/ > /a/
/i/ > /e/
/y/ > /i/
Final phonology: /e i a 2 u O/
It was a bit more far-reaching than I intended, though. (/emita4M/ would have become /ametO4i/!).
EDIT: Woah, I just noticed I'm over 1000 posts! DANG. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, since I'm not really going for "future Latvian", and I want it to be mutually unintelligible with Latvian, what I did is more like vowel scrambling than anything else And yes, I'm not sure, how should I show diphthongs in CXS
/u:/ -> /uo/ -> /iu/ -> /i:/ -> /ie/ -> /ei/ -> /E:/ -> /&:/ -> /a:/ -> /O:/
/a/ -> /O/ -> /u/ -> /i/ -> /E/ -> /&/ -> /a/
/Oi/ -> /au/ -> /ai/ -> /an/
You see, the role of Latvian is getting more and more of inspirational than practical type But anyway, please, tell me, how unnatural exactly is this
And yes, you may have quessed, I want to mess with some consonants too |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tolkien_Freak
Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 1231 Location: in front of my computer. always.
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A lot of it is pretty unnatural, and it would probably take thousands of years for chains that long to finish ^_^ (your diphthongs are fine though, it's not complicated)
Suggestions to get from point A to point B:
/u:/ > /y:/ > /i:/ > /ai/ > /&i/ > /&:/ > /a:/ > /O:/
/a/ > /O/ > /o/ > /u/ > /y/ > /i/ > /ie/ > /iE/ > /E/ > /&/ > /a/ (wait, what's the point of this? it's a circle!)
And I don't think you can get an n out of a vowel, unless the vowel's nasalised, which generally only is created from an n. (/an/ > /a~/, /a~/ > /an/). If you already have nasalised vowels you can do it, but I don't know how otherwise.
If you're not going for a 'future Latvian', though, the changes hardly need to be realistic since the point isn't that they're happening. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kiri
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's why I said what I do is vowel scramble before anything else
But I THINK I'm going to more or less stick with it
The n is not really a part of the vowel scramble, it just happens |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|