GitP Conworlding/Worldbuilding Project - Language Thread

[Maximum Zersk]

Main Project Thread is here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138726)

Welcome to the Giant in the Playground Conworlding Project Language Thread.

What is this about? Well, linguistic discussion was taking up a large part of the thread. So the idea was offered that we make a thread mainly for language, as to not scare away others.

Now, currently we are working on the Northern River Sharlaq Proto-Language, which we can then make other languages off of.

Soon, I will post up the information I have accumulated.

Now, linguistics time!

Relevant Documents:

Grammar (http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AXLJmAjB_05SZGdyZDdwcHRfMGN2NXJnbWN3&hl=en)

[Szilard]

I always thought the word kufe would be a cool replacement for the word life. Though I only think that because it was a typo I once made and I ran with it. :smalltongue:

[ref]

The 'One Left' typo, eh?

[Tulio d Bard]

Well, most people here won't know what I'm talking about (wait for MK's update on the first post), but how are the new 3rd Declension's Vowels going to be (I didn't check the others, but I guess they're okay)?

[Maximum Zersk]

Well, most people here won't know what I'm talking about (wait for MK's update on the first post), but how are the new 3rd Declension's Vowels going to be (I didn't check the others, but I guess they're okay)?

I just changed them into unrounded vowels.

[Maximum Zersk]

And bam, here's what I've got recorded for the Northern River-Sharlaq Proto-Language right now.

Right here. (http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AXLJmAjB_05SZGdyZDdwcHRfMGN2NXJnbWN3&hl=en)

[Maximum Zersk]

The Dreaded Third Post, sorry. :smallfrown:

Anyway, I have an idea. What if we had a negative at the end of the sentence? Like Japanese? (I have no idea if any other languages use that. :smalltongue:) So if you wanted to say, for example, "I didn't eat an apple", you would say, "Eat I an apple didn't." Sound good to you guys?

Also, thinking more about the numbers. I'm thinking about one for "none", one for "single", one for "indefinite even", and one for "indefinite odd." How does this sound? So, let's say you didn't want to eat some apples. You would say "Eat I [indefinite odd] apple didn't", or something to that effect.

Also, how should we go about working on the words, when we get to them?

[Tulio d Bard]

The Dreaded Third Post, sorry. :smallfrown:

Anyway, I have an idea. What if we had a negative at the end of the sentence? Like Japanese? (I have no idea if any other languages use that. :smalltongue:) So if you wanted to say, for example, "I didn't eat an apple", you would say, "Eat I an apple didn't." Sound good to you guys?

Could be.


Also, thinking more about the numbers. I'm thinking about one for "none", one for "single", one for "indefinite even", and one for "indefinite odd." How does this sound? So, let's say you didn't want to eat some apples. You would say "Eat I [indefinite odd] apple didn't", or something to that effect.

Wait, why should we make things different if the number is even (not divisible by two) or odd (divisible by two)?
Yeah, I didn't get what "indefinite even/odd" means... :smalltongue:


Also, how should we go about working on the words, when we get to them?

Now, THAT's a good question...
I'll try to learn something on phonetics first. I guess it will be pretty important.

[Maximum Zersk]

Wait, why should we make things different if the number is even (not divisible by two) or odd (divisible by two)?
Yeah, I didn't get what "indefinite even/odd" means... :smalltongue:


_OOOOO_
O\(O.o)/ Don't know, just thought of it on impulse. So, how bout Null, Singular, and Plural, then? Does that sound good?



Now, THAT's a good question...
I'll try to learn something on phonetics first. I guess it will be pretty important.


I remember reading something on a Conlanging post saying that you should go about in the order that they learn about the object. For example. the word for "fire" would coming before "making fire."

[ref]

Yeah, that makes sense. Also, we should define the syllable structure, and then build words from that. Common words should be short, one or two syllables. Except when they are related to other simple words. For instance, riverkin may have a word for 'water', and the word for 'sea' coming from 'harmful' and 'water' stuck together, because salt water might be harmful for them. The double word has evolved slightly, and although you can recognize the origins as 'harmful water', it is no longer two words but one. Like if it was "watermful", for instance.

[Maximum Zersk]

Well, this is just a Proto-language, so we don't need to worry about language evolution yet. We'll get to that soon enough.

The syllable structure is CVC. So Consonant-Vowel-Consonant. I'm thinking that the first Consonant won't be mandatory. How does that sound?

I think that the first words to think of would be "water", "to see", and "to swim." Considering they are some of the first things that the Sharlaq will do in their lives, they'll come first.

I'm thinking a bit. I'll post up some words as I think of them.

[ref]

ok, so [C]VC it is. Yeah, those are good first words. They may end up use 'swim' are our 'go'. Plus, of course, words for themselves.

[Maximum Zersk]

I thought the same thing, having the word "to go" and "to swim" as the same thing.

Now let's see here...

Water; Jiqq, Feminine.
Forms of Jiqq would be: Jiqqsil, Jiqqech/Jiqqekh, Jiqqtsik, Jiqqching/Jiqqkhing, Jiqqech/Jiqqekh.

Man, Romanization's a pain. Anyway, the "J" is pronounced like other European languages: like a "Y". And the ch is pronounced German style. Like "Kh". I made the word one syllable long, so it doesn't get too big.

Anyway, moving on.

Crap, I just remembered. We can't work on verbs until we've figured out how we're going to do tense.

[Tulio d Bard]

Yeah, we should really think about the other lexical classes we have (which are they and how they work).

Besides naming first the things they do first, we could also name what the elders want them to learn first (gods, people [sharlaq, isn't it?], brother, etc.).

[Maximum Zersk]

I'm thinking of the standard ones; nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjective, adverbs, pre/postpositions, conjunctions, articles, etc.

I've heard of conlangs that get rid of one of those classes. Don't know how to do it, though.

I'll make a verb conjugation chart later.

[ref]

Usually by having another category double up. For instance, a conlang may avoid adjectives like "red", instead having a verb "to red". "This car reds", "The table redded, but we painted it and now it blacks", "The traffic lights are redding" (because it's temporary), so on.

I'm not sure this fits with any of our races. For verbs, what tenses are we gonna have? some conlangs have multiple pasts and futures. For instance, Sharlaq could have "past", "immediate past" (like, in the last hour or so, or maybe less. If something else big enough happened in between then it's no longer immediate past), "present", and "future".

Highly technical gnomes, when we get to them, can get a full spectrum like ancient, distant past, recent past, yesterday, earlier today, immediate past, present, immediate future, tomorrow, in the next week, future, eventual future. Or something like that.

The cool thing of conlangs is that one can experiment a lot, hehe.

Back to Sharlaq, since it's agglutinative, then aspect (swam vs was swimming vs had swam) could be a different modifier.

Jitsech = to swim (derived from Jiqq)
Jitsechkul = swim(s)
Jitsechtak = swam
Jitsechkulol = is swimming
Jitsechtakol = was swimming.
Jitsechtakach = had swam
Jitsechtakolach = had been swimming

[Maximum Zersk]

I don't really understand the difference. What is the difference between perfect and non-perfect, progressive and non-progressive exactly?

[ref]

Perfect shows the action is over, while non-perfect means it was on-going. Basically:

I ate this morning (I'm not eating now, but I was eating at the time I'm talking about)
I had eaten already (I had finished eating before the time I'm talking about. The action was already complete, perfect)
I was eating when the phone rang (I started eating before the phone rang, and I finished eating after that. The action was in progress)

[Cealocanth]

The Dreaded Third Post, sorry. :smallfrown:

Anyway, I have an idea. What if we had a negative at the end of the sentence? Like Japanese? (I have no idea if any other languages use that. :smalltongue:) So if you wanted to say, for example, "I didn't eat an apple", you would say, "Eat I an apple didn't." Sound good to you guys?

Yoda you are?

I actually have no idea what you're talking about here but I can't pass up a chance to say that. If this is about a new language, I've always found the way that Hebrew doesn't use vowels in everyday script at all. Perhaps that can be incorporated.

[Maximum Zersk]

Yoda you are?

I actually have no idea what you're talking about here but I can't pass up a chance to say that. If this is about a new language, I've always found the way that Hebrew doesn't use vowels in everyday script at all. Perhaps that can be incorporated.

The abjad? I've heard of those, yes. (In fact, I have to read a Semi-Abjad at least thrice a week.:smalltongue:)

Seems interesting. We'll get to that when it comes to writing system, though.

[Tulio d Bard]

There's one thing I always mess up here. Are our crocs pacific or aggressive? I believe it affects the language somehow. Aggressive would have more future tenses than past ones (focus on the future actions) and pacific would have more past tenses (focus on the history). It's just an opinion.

And what are the grammatical persons (?) we'll have and which persons (?) will have different verb conjugations?

[Maximum Zersk]

There's one thing I always mess up here. Are our crocs pacific or aggressive? I believe it affects the language somehow. Aggressive would have more future tenses than past ones (focus on the future actions) and pacific would have more past tenses (focus on the history). It's just an opinion.

And what are the grammatical persons (?) we'll have and which persons (?) will have different verb conjugations?

The Sharlaq are largely pacific, so the tenses would be more past.

I'll work on a table of persons and conjugation.

[Maximum Zersk]

Okay, Conjugation table time.

{TABLE]|Singular|Plural
First|
-ak|
--|
Second|
-ach|
--|
Third|
-att|
--|
[/TABLE]

Does this seem good? The plural would be the same as the singular. One would have to tell from context.

Some Tenses.

Ancient Past, Moderate Past, Recent Past, Present, Future.

[Tulio d Bard]

Okay, Conjugation table time.

{TABLE]|Singular|Plural
First|
-ak|
--|
Second|
-ach|
--|
Third|
-att|
--|
[/TABLE]

Does this seem good? The plural would be the same as the singular. One would have to tell from context.

Some Tenses.

Ancient Past, Moderate Past, Recent Past, Present, Future.

I think we can try it with no plurals.
What's the difference between -ak and -ach pronunciation?

[Maximum Zersk]

Ach is pronounced with the english ch. It's getting a bit confusing, so I'm going to reorganize the romanization.

[Tulio d Bard]

Ach is pronounced with the english ch. It's getting a bit confusing, so I'm going to reorganize the romanization.

I see. I should really spend some time learning phonemes...

[Maximum Zersk]

Okay, verb time.

To swim, to move; Jeqq
To speak; Keng
To see; Seh
To breath; Nots
To listen; Qey
To be; Shul

And pronouns.

First-person singular; Tet
Second-person singular; Erget
Third-person singular; Shur

First-person plural; Tetnij
Second-person plural; Ergetnij
Third-person plural; Shurnij

EDIT: So a sentence may look like:

Tetlaq sehak jiqekh. (I see water.)

EDITEDIT: Whoops! Grammar mistake!

Here's a fixed sentence.

Sehak tetlaq jiqekh.

[Maximum Zersk]

Moar wurds.

Nouns
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq|Gender||English|Sharlaq|Gender||En glish|Sharlaq|Gender
Fire|Tsun|Neuter||Head|Nang|Masculine||Flow
Sky|Chal|Masculine||Hand|Ngiol|Feminine||Spring
Clouds|Het|Neuter||Tail|Terat|Neuter||Summer
Sea|Jiqqtill|Masculine||Mouth|Kengnang|Masculine|| Fall
Order|Adqan|Neuter||Arm|Tsaiar|Masculine||Winter
Chaos|Tsinadqan|Neuter||Leg|Shot|Neuter||Tree
Male|Ngoin|Masculine||Foot|Nok|Neuter||Animal
Female|Khar|Feminine||Stomach|Tsouh|Feminine||Magi c
Child|Shar|Feminine||Chest|Arget|Masculine
Land|Etsat|Masculine||Eye|Sehneken|Feminine
River|Etsatjiqq|Feminine||Snout/Nose|Edetneken|Neuter
Rain|Chaljiqq|Neuter||Light|Oidul|Neuter
Island|Jiqqtilletsat|Masculine||Shadow|Dene'oidul| Neuter
Small Island|Jiqqtsintilletsat|Masculine||Sun|Etairajoqq ul|Feminine
Creek|Tsintilletsatjiqq|Feminine||Moon|Denetairajo qqul|Masculine
Past|Otsten|Masculine||Day|Etaira|Feminine
Future|Eten|Feminine||Night|Denetaira|Masculine
Seer|Etensehsharlaq|Feminine||Star|Joqqul|Neuter
[/TABLE]

Adjectives
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
Big|Atill
Small|Tsintill
Hot|Tseqq
Cold|Tsintseqq
Fast|Dek
Slow|Tsindek
Far|Aik
Close|Tsinaik
Blind|Denseh
[/TABLE]

Verb
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
To live|Altateq
To die|Denaltateq
To hear|Aeqateq
To eat|Qqenteq
To drink|Jiqqenteq
[/TABLE]

Articles
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
The (Definite Article, Masculine)|Jash
The (Definite Article, Feminine)|Jesh
The (Definite Article, Neuter)|Josh
A (Indefinite Article, Masculine)|Ajash
A (Indefinite Article, Feminine)|Ajesh
A (Indefinite Article, Neuter)|Ajosh
[/TABLE]

Postpositions
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
Above|Khoin
Under|Denakhoin
Within|Terdoin
Without|Denaterdoin
Beside|Choin
Behind|Denajoin
In front|Join
To|Qoin
From|Toroin
[/TABLE]

Sentence example.

The man sees under the sun.

Sees the man the sun under.

Sehatt jash ngoinlaq jesh Etairrajoqqulkhing denakhoin.

[Tulio d Bard]

Wow, you advanced things a lot now!

Then we have the following endings:

Nouns: -sil, -qekh, -tsik, -khing, -qqeh, -laq, -yal, -chaaq, -ngil, -was, -ruk, -hokh, -nuqq, -ur, -onguk;
Verbs: -ak, -ach, -att (we only have present tense until now);
Postpositions: -oin;

We also have the Hak- prefix for plural nouns, the infix -nij- (between the stem and the declension suffix) for plural pronouns, and the prefix Dena- for opposite postpositions.
All the articles have an -sh ending and indefinite articles have an A- prefix, although there is no problem using them in other words (I guess).

The Tsin particle indicates "opposite" and Dene means something like "night version".

Are pronouns normally declined (according to gender)?
Is there any reason for all those -teq verb endings or were you just making things simpler?
Does "Beside"/"Choing" have this ending "g"?

Shouldn't we decline Etairrajoqqul as Locative, making it Etairrajoqqulkhing?

Just say if I got anything wrong here.

[Maximum Zersk]

Wow, you advanced things a lot now!

Then we have the following endings:

Nouns: -sil, -qekh, -tsik, -khing, -qqeh, -laq, -yal, -chaaq, -ngil, -was, -ruk, -hokh, -nuqq, -ur, -onguk;
Verbs: -ak, -ach, -att (we only have present tense until now);
Postpositions: -oin;

We also have the Hak- prefix for plural nouns, the infix -nij- (between the stem and the declension suffix) for plural pronouns, and the prefix Dena- for opposite postpositions.
All the articles have an -sh ending and indefinite articles have an A- prefix, although there is no problem using them in other words (I guess).


Basically Right. :smallwink:


The Tsin particle indicates "opposite" and Dene means something like "night version".


Generally. Tsin indicates opposite, yes. Dene means "lack of".


Are pronouns normally declined (according to gender)?

Yep. If the gender is unknown, neuter is used.


Is there any reason for all those -teq verb endings or were you just making things simpler?

They were meant to show infinitives. It's something I've noticed while learning German. Verb Infinitives will end in -en. Segeln, Haben, Moechten, etc.. Only the Irregular verbs would be different.


Does "Beside"/"Choing" have this ending "g"?

Oh, yeah, didn't notice that. :smallredface:


Shouldn't we decline Etairrajoqqul as Locative, making it Etairrajoqqulkhing?


Oh, whoops. :smallredface:

I'll fix the mistakes, then.

[ref]

That's quite good. Sentences end up being quite the mouthful, but that's intended, hehe. Once we have this finished, someone should gather all the grammar/lexicon and put that in an organized way somewhere.

[Tulio d Bard]

And talking about the tenses, I think it would be nice if we had these ones:


Legendary past: used to tell legends, stories, myths, etc.;
Ancient past: used when the action took place a long time ago or in an indefinite time;
Recent past: used when the action took place recently (one week ago tops);
Present: duh;
Future: used when the action will take place in the future;
Prophesied future: used to tell predictions, prophecies, augurs, etc.

And probably we'll need some continuous tenses. What do you think, guys?

[Maximum Zersk]

That's quite good. Sentences end up being quite the mouthful, but that's intended, hehe. Once we have this finished, someone should gather all the grammar/lexicon and put that in an organized way somewhere.

I'll get to that right away. The grammar is in the file that I'll put in the first post. The lexicon will be in a new file.

Also, those are some pretty good tenses.

Moving on with the lexicon.

Nouns
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq|Gender
Flow|Jeqqjiqq|Feminine
Season|Eqaj|Neuter
Spring|Qoikheqaj|Masculine
Summer|Tsekheqaj|Feminine
Fall|Chokheqaj|Neuter
Winter|Ngakheqaj|Masculine
Magic|Jenjaqetsay|Neuter
Nature|Jenjaq|Masculine
Being|Sharlaq*|Feminine
Home|Oudateqajnik|Masculine
Building|Qajnik|Feminine
Village|Dashen|Neuter
Town|Dashenatill|Neuter
City|Dashenatillatill|Neuter
God|Soreg|Feminine
Power|Etsej|Neuter
[/TABLE]


* I'm guessing that Sharlaq would be the word for being. The Sharlaq themselves would have a longer name for themselves. Like Tsekhetsharlaq, or First Being.
** A Sharlaq could have more than one nest of babies, maybe? If they do, then this is what the hatchlings would call their brothers from the other nest.

Numerals
NOTE: Sharlaq use Base 9, I'm thinking. Shall we go with it?
{TABLE]English|Base 10|Sharlaq|Base 9
One|1|Tsekh|1
Two|2|Chokh|2
Three|3|Ngakh|3
Four|4|Qoikh|4
Five|5|Shakh|5
Six|6|Saikh|6
Seven|7|Naikh|7
Eight|8|Laikh|8
Nine|9|Erekh|10
Ten|10|Erekhatsekh|11
Eleven|11|Erekhachokh|12
Twelve|12|Erekhangakh|13
[/TABLE]

...ad infinitum. How does that seem? I'll add larger numbers like a hundred, thousand and such later on. Who knows, maybe in the Proto-language, they had no need for an order of magnitude larger than a thousand. (Or, 729 for you Base-10 users. :smallwink:)

Honorifics
Now, how about this? I'm thinking of a list of honorifics that they would use.
{TABLE]Sharlaq|Meaning/Usage
|Used to addresss Siblings.
|Used to address beings from a different nest but are still related to you. (See above.)
|Used to address Elders.
|Used to address cousins
|Used to address largely unrelated Sharlaq.
|Used to address foreigners.
[/TABLE]

Nothing yet, but I'll think of something.

[B]Verbs
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
To reside|Oudatek
[/TABLE]

[ref]

Base 9, eh? interesting.

The seasons are called season one, season two, so on. If there are three months in each season (is that true, btw?) and if we associate moons with months as is usual, then we'd have Tsekheqajtsekhdenetairajoqqul to Qolkheqajngakhdenetairajoqqul. Good luck with learning those!

[Tulio d Bard]

You could also make honorifcs for political leaders and for religious leaders, or one honorific for leaders in general. Well, maybe the political leader is also the religious one.


Base 9, eh? interesting.

The seasons are called season one, season two, so on. If there are three months in each season (is that true, btw?) and if we associate moons with months as is usual, then we'd have Tsekheqajtsekhdenetairajoqqul to Qolkheqajngakhdenetairajoqqul. Good luck with learning those!

I can't wait to see my friends' faces as I speak those in place of the months' names. :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, base-9 seems ok to me. And I believe we won't need longer numbers in a while.

[ref]

yeah, you don't usually need large specific numbers. When large numbers are used are usually round numbers. Their round numbers are gonna be different from ours, but still they will use their large round numbers mostly.

[Maximum Zersk]

Base 9, eh? interesting.

The seasons are called season one, season two, so on. If there are three months in each season (is that true, btw?) and if we associate moons with months as is usual, then we'd have Tsekheqajtsekhdenetairajoqqul to Qolkheqajngakhdenetairajoqqul. Good luck with learning those!

Heh, that'll be fun. :smallbiggrin:

I'm seeing what other words to put in the lexicon. Also, I have a Google Doc of the lexicon I'm trying to fill with what we've got.

[Tulio d Bard]

What if -tal was added to a number to give an ordinal meaning?

Ngakh -> Three
Ngakhtal -> Third

We could also ignore ordinals using sentences like "This is the car one I've ever bought." instead of "This is the first car I've ever bought."

[Maximum Zersk]

Interesting. Though we'll see how it fits. I'm sort of inclined to the "no ordinals" myself.

[ref]

About "would a logical language be created naturally", I thought maybe not completely logical, but a highy science community would naturally want to evolve language to eliminate ambiguity, so I think it would be close to logical, but still not sounding too weird, just highly structured.

[Salbazier]

That was quite a mouthful :smallconfused:

I you guys don't mind me, I have some questions. Is there any function to make so many tenses? Beyond for the makers to have fun of course.

Ancient and legendary tense seems a bit overlapping to me. It makes sense for legends and myth to have different tense (giving different feeling in reading, like the use of archaic in some literatures) but ancient... Ancient tales has tendency to mix with legends, where to draw the line? How long in the past something must happened to be referred with ancient rather than recent past tense?

[Maximum Zersk]

Okay, I think I need to clear something up.

Some of you may notice that the only difference between "Small Island" [Jiqqtsintilletsat] and "Creek" [Tsintilletsatjiqq] is the order of the words. I think I can generalize this.

The thing that is more important or more noticable, to say, comes first. For example, "Jiqqtsintilletsat", or "Water small-land". Because it is an island, the fact that water surrounds it is important. With "Tsintilletsatjiqq", or "Small-land Water", the fact that it is surrounded by land is important.

Make sense?

Anyway, onto more lexicon.

{TABLE]English|Sharlaq|Gender
Speech|Kengets|Masculine
Language|Kengetsadqan|Masculine
Animal|Jenjaqlukh Sharlaq|Feminine
Life|Altaqq|Neuter
Death|Denaltaqq|Masculine
Blood|Altaqqjiqq|Feminine
[/TABLE]

I think a possessive marker would be the suffix lukh.

Moar adjectives.

{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
Full|Tjhung
Empty|Denatjhung
[/TABLE]

Also, I think we should have some lines to be able to translate to.

Here's one.

My hovercraft is full of eels.

We probably don't need an actual word for hovercraft, so we'll just use HO'ERCRA'T

So it'd be:

Is my hovercraft full eels of. I think.

[Tulio d Bard]

That was quite a mouthful :smallconfused:

I you guys don't mind me, I have some questions. Is there any function to make so many tenses? Beyond for the makers to have fun of course.

Ancient and legendary tense seems a bit overlapping to me. It makes sense for legends and myth to have different tense (giving different feeling in reading, like the use of archaic in some literatures) but ancient... Ancient tales has tendency to mix with legends, where to draw the line? How long in the past something must happened to be referred with ancient rather than recent past tense?

Don't worry about questioning, it will only help us.
Considering that the sharlaq focus a lot on culture and myths, my idea is that Legendary and Prophesied tenses are related to things that aren't sure to happen/have happened, while the other four are about usual things that will nigh certainly happen/have certainly happened. See:


Legendary past: And then, Kultrok¹ took his people from the mouth of the angry Densehetensehsharlaq.
Ancient past: My brother gave me this scar when I was a little girl.
Recent past: I saw that black bird two days ago!
Present: My hovercraft is full of eels.
Future: Next year, our Spring Festival will be much bigger.
Prophesied future: When Denaltateqoidul burns in the sky, the Sharlaq people will begin an endless war against their own brothers.


We could make Ancient and Recent past a single tense, but I was trying to strength the past. MZ's suggested "Ancient Past, Moderate Past, Recent Past, Present, Future" before me, so we could also pick that.
¹Are proper nouns declined as well?

@ref: Are you talking about gnomes' language? I believe that one will be much harder to create.

@Zersk: We'll need possessives. And I think we can cut the "of" (don't agree without thinking, 'cause I didn't thought).

[Maximum Zersk]

@Zersk: We'll need possessives. And I think we can cut the "of" (don't agree without thinking, 'cause I didn't thought).

Should we? I have no idea. We could do a whole variety of "of"s, each for a different context, if that's what you're talking about.

And no, Proper nouns wouldn't be declined.

[ref]

Yes, I was talking about the Gnomes' language. See? What Zersk said could also be a feature of the Gnomes' language. (btw, how are those languages called?) A language that works on removing ambiguities would have lots of prepositions (among other tiny words we natural-language speakers tend to gloss over).

[Tulio d Bard]

Should we? I have no idea. We could do a whole variety of "of"s, each for a different context, if that's what you're talking about.

And no, Proper nouns wouldn't be declined.

Yes, I was talking about the Gnomes' language. See? What Zersk said could also be a feature of the Gnomes' language. (btw, how are those languages called?) A language that works on removing ambiguities would have lots of prepositions (among other tiny words we natural-language speakers tend to gloss over).

I don't think Sharlaqish(?) cares too much about ambiguities, that's why I said we could remove some prepositions (not with these words). But I believe it can be decided later.

Another phrase: "I am no longer infected."

[ref]

Yeah, again I was talking about the Gnomes.

[ufo]

A thought on Sharlaq honorifics: They could all end in Sharlaq, so that "sibling" becomes "born-with-me being" and "different race" becomes "unlike-me being", if you catch my drift.

[Maximum Zersk]

That actually might work, I think. But we'll have to see it first.

[ref]

I like it, though they would probably have evolved to something like 'laq.

[Maximum Zersk]

Or possibly Shorlaq. So...

Tsekhetsharlaq becomes;

Dzekhteshorlaq

Tsokhetsharoq

Sekhsharlag

[Cinnamonbunnies]

My hovercraft is full of eels.

We probably don't need an actual word for hovercraft, so we'll just use HO'ERCRA'T

So it'd be:

Is my hovercraft full eels of. I think.

Assuming 'tjhung' to hold, also, the meaning 'full-of' .. how would the eels be conjugated after 'tjhung'?

Is my hovercraft full-of eels.

Shulatt tetwas ho'ercra'tsil tjhungsil <eel>-PLURAL-DATIVE


But .. in the context of such a complex agglutinative language, on a proto level at that, this construction seems out of place, indicative almost of its being a conlang.

Oudatekatt ho'ercra'tking <eels>-PLURAL-NOM. <many>-PLURAL-NOM.?

Though .. do the Northern Mayadilian languages consider a noun conjugated in the locative to be an adjective for the purpose of word order? I just assumed.

Well, in either case. The prior sentence sounds, to me, much like changing the word order of English and leaving it at that. Though the language would allow for it, it sounds slightly odd to me. Course the latter doesn't really convey the same meaning :/


So .. do words imported from other languages fall into specific categories some or all of the time?
E.g., imported nouns always being in the neuter? or are they always put into an appropriate category (hovercraft being related to air, air being masculine..)

Are there general rules for how conjugated words are treated in relation to sentence structure?
E.g., where does a noun in the locative end up, and such.

Does the language use complex adjectives such as "full of," and if not, how does it treat constructions which in English and other languages would use such adjectives?



Sorry, I .. never ever post but when I'm bored, and I thought it'd be interesting to see how you'd go ahead constructing this .. soo dont mind me! get back to your .. yes.

[Maximum Zersk]

Assuming 'tjhung' to hold, also, the meaning 'full-of' .. how would the eels be conjugated after 'tjhung'?


Erm, Tjhung [tʲɯŋ] means full, not to hold. :smalltongue:

You know, I think I made a mistake there. It should be 'Is my hovercraft eels full of.'



Is my hovercraft full-of eels.

Shulatt tetwas ho'ercra'tsil tjhungsil <eel>-PLURAL-DATIVE


The adjective wouldn't need a declension, I don't think. :smalltongue:

And the plural is the interfix -nij-. So, let's say eel would be the feminine sotrok, it'd be Sotroknijchaaq.



But .. in the context of such a complex agglutinative language, on a proto level at that, this construction seems out of place, indicative almost of its being a conlang.


Really? Why is that?



Oudatekatt ho'ercra'tking <eels>-PLURAL-NOM. <many>-PLURAL-NOM.?


Eh, it doesn't really fit as well.



Though .. do the Northern Mayadilian languages consider a noun conjugated in the locative to be an adjective for the purpose of word order? I just assumed.


No idea yet. :/



Well, in either case. The prior sentence sounds, to me, much like changing the word order of English and leaving it at that. Though the language would allow for it, it sounds slightly odd to me. Course the latter doesn't really convey the same meaning :/


I'm just hoping it doesn't end up too much like a relic. I guess it wasn't the greatest sentence to use.



So .. do words imported from other languages fall into specific categories some or all of the time?
E.g., imported nouns always being in the neuter? or are they always put into an appropriate category (hovercraft being related to air, air being masculine..)


Eh, put into neuter.



Are there general rules for how conjugated words are treated in relation to sentence structure?
E.g., where does a noun in the locative end up, and such.


Not sure yet. :smallredface:



Does the language use complex adjectives such as "full of," and if not, how does it treat constructions which in English and other languages would use such adjectives?
[QUOTE]

Again, not sure yet. :smalltongue:

[QUOTE]
Sorry, I .. never ever post but when I'm bored, and I thought it'd be interesting to see how you'd go ahead constructing this .. soo dont mind me! get back to your .. yes.

Oh, it fine. You're welcome to jump in whenever you want. :smalltongue:

[ref]

Normally, the selling point of declensions is that word-order can be a bit more relaxed, because the cases show what's meant to be where.

When we proceed to gnomes, if it ends up being close to what I envisioned, the word order will be much stricter.

[Maximum Zersk]

When we proceed to gnomes, if it ends up being close to what I envisioned, the word order will be much stricter.

So, similar to Roman, then? :smalltongue:

Gnoman Soldier: What's that your writing there? "Tergekhen"? Ergative??

[ref]

Yeah, like that. :smalltongue:

[Maximum Zersk]

More words.

Nouns
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq|Gender
North|Lerken|Masculine
East|Lertaq|Feminine
West|Lerngon|Neuter
South|Lersad|Feminine
Mountain|Adelletsat|Feminine
Group|Nejen|Masculine
Mountain Range|Adelletsatnejen|Feminine
[/table]

Adverbs
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
Quickly|Dekatar
Slowly|Tsindekatar
[/table]

Adjective
{TABLE]English|Sharlaq
Tall|Adell
Short|Tsinadell
[/TABLE]

[ufo]

So, I take that the gender of compound words is defined by the first of the words in the compound?

[Maximum Zersk]

Uh, sure? To be honest, I didn't make a rule for that, but okay. :smalltongue:

[ref]

When we get ready to go into Gnomish, I will present my envisioning of that.

[ufo]

Uh, sure? To be honest, I didn't make a rule for that, but okay. :smalltongue:

Well, "adelletsat" is feminine, "nejen" is masculine and "adelletsatnejen" is feminine, so I assumed... :smalltongue:

Really, I don't know a lot of grammatics 'n' sutff, but just in case I had spotted something, I might as well point it out :smallbiggrin:

[Maximum Zersk]

No, no, it's cool. Sounds interesting, though, so we'll try it out.

ref: Right after the Sharlaq proto-langs. I'm guessing that the two language trees would have some form of mixing, the Gnomes and the Sharlaq knowing each other for so long. The humans would come later.

[ref]

Yeah, but while Sharlaq went agglutinative, Gnomish went a totally different direction. So now they're pretty different. Still, there's some quality that makes a Sharlaq and a Gnome, in the (rare?) occasions where they talk to each other, not having to strain much to translate from one to the other.

I envision that in both societies there are a few members that especialized in quick translation and they serve as interpreters when needed.

[Maximum Zersk]

Yeah, but what I meant is that history can affect language. For example, many East Indian Languages are technically Indo-European, the languages have since mixed with Dravidian Languages and such.

What I mean is that after years of history, some Sharlaq languages may have mixed a bit with others.

[ref]

Ah yes, of course. But we're going with the "pure" languages here, so to speak. One would have to look very hard to find the common roots of Gnomish and Sharlaq.

[Maximum Zersk]

You're looking the wrong way here. :smallredface:

Okay, another example; Modern English. It was made as a mixture of Old French and Old English. Something like that might happen to a language later right?

An In-World example. Sharlaq Area A has been taken over by the empire. The Area A Language gets mixed with Latin Gnoman to make Sharlaq Language B.

[ref]

Ah, you're talking dialects. Yeah, that can happen. Though the way I'm seeing Gnomish right now, the mixed language is gonna be a bit messy, hehe.

[Tulio d Bard]

Well, it's already messy, so no problem! :smallbiggrin:

(yay, I'm back! Soon, I'll be completely back!)

[ref]

Welcome almost back, then, Tulio!

[Maximum Zersk]

Okay, to move on with this:

Adjectives will be inflected by gender and number, so we'll have to figure out how to inflect them.

My idea is after the adjective, you add a suffix indicating the gender, and a prefix indicating number. So it'd work like this.

[num]adj[gen]

So let's make it that -il is feminine, -al is masculine, and -ul is neutral. Then, sek- is singular, and naj- is plural. So let's say you're talking about two small houses (accusative). The Noun Phrase would look like so:

Najtotal-chokh-oudateqayniknijjal.

This is assuming that numerals come after the adjective, but before the noun.

Now, tenses. What we've got is either a Legendary-Ancient-Recent-Present-Recent-Prophesied system, or Ancient-Recent-Present-Future system. Personally, I think the latter system works better, since it isn't as complicated, and it doesn't have the whole "Sharlaq think of their beliefs as just myths" thing that the Legendary and Prophesied tenses sort of imply. I don't know. For now, I'll work on the latter. I'll let Tulio figure out the former one. Also, I think will use Perfect and Non-Perfect, but I'll worry about that later.

Anyhoo, I think I'll make the tenses--you guessed it--suffixes. So, Ancient = -Tjaj, Moderate = -Haj, Present = -Qan, Future = -Dan.

So let's say you were swimming earlier today, and you're the one talking. The verb phrase should look like so:

Jeqqat-haj

I put the hyphen so nobody pronounces it 'ye'athay'. :smallwink:

So how's that for now?

[ref]

You could borrow a small page from the (as of yet unpublished) Gnomish and use Legendary as a special affix added to Ancient, and Prophesied as a special affix added to Future.

Gnomish will also have many tenses in past and future (maybe even in present) since it's the catch of Gnomish to be absolutely clear of what one wants to say (students of Gnomish, don't worry. They're gonna be pretty regular), so you wouldn't want to step much on the toes of that (but then again, gnomes don't have a Legendary or Prophesied tense).

[Tulio d Bard]

...it doesn't have the whole "Sharlaq think of their beliefs as just myths" thing that the Legendary and Prophesied tenses sort of imply.

:smalleek: I never thought that way... Having different tenses for myths is the same than recognizing they're not truth (or almost that). The other option may be better.

So, what exactly marks the end of a protolanguage creation? (So that we can give Gnomish a try)

[Maximum Zersk]

:smalleek: I never thought that way... Having different tenses for myths is the same than recognizing they're not truth (or almost that). The other option may be better.

So, what exactly marks the end of a protolanguage creation? (So that we can give Gnomish a try)

:smalltongue: I was sorta curious about that one. Ah well.

The protolanguage creation ends when we think we have enough words and the grammar is finished. At least to the point where you can have a conversation with someone.

[Maximum Zersk]

Well, let's see if I can make a proper sentence. If I can, maybe we can move to grammar constructions. How about the sentence, "It's mine!"?

First, we need to get the word's into position. The sentence structure (VSO) means that it will look like so:

Is it mine!

But that's still not right. We don't have a possessive pronoun, so instead, we do this:

Is it of I!

But that's still not right, because the preposition is in the wrong place! So we move that to get:

Is it I of!

That's good. Now we figure out which declensions to put on the nouns. There are two of them. of them, Accusative and Genitive, right? So we get this.

Is it[gen] I[acc] of!

That seems right. So now, we add the inflections to the verb. It's third person, so the proper ending would be -at. Then, it's in a present tense, so you add -qan after that. So the sentence is:

Is[1st][pres] it[gen] I[acc] of!

Whew, complicated! :smalltongue: Now we can translate it. I'll keep the speaker's gender undefined.

Shulatqan shuronguk tet-hokh...

And now I just noticed that I didn't make a possessive postposition. No matter, I'll use from. So the sentence will be:

Shulattqan shuronguk tet-hokh toroin.

There.

EDIT: Funny how a phrase that' two syllables long becomes five times larger in another language. :smalltongue:

And you can start the Gnomish, ref.

[Tulio d Bard]

Shouldn't it be third person?

I believe ref has a ton of ideas stored for Gnomish. :smalleek:

[Maximum Zersk]

Yeah, he sent me the file too.

Ah yes, now that you mention it. Let me fix that.

Turns out I used the wrong person in the first place, so it's fine. :smalltongue:

[ref]

OK, Let's start with Gnomish. I will start with the concept I had with this language.

As gnomes are to be the highly technological race, their language reflects on that. One thing they want to avoid is miscomunication, so the language has evolved as to avoid all sort of ambiguities, while still being something that could have evolved naturally, even if needing a conscious effort for the first speakers of the language that became modern Gnomish to do that.

This avoiding of ambiguities works in all levels of the language. Lexically, care is taken that no two words are close enough that they can be confused. Since that is not really possible once the language grows past a certain point, what they do is add disambiguators if they think it is needed. It would be like saying "ship-transport" vs "sheep-animal" in English. The writing helps to do that more transparently.

Morphologically, the sentences are structured fairly well to show what role every part of our sentence is playing, but where Sharlaq is agglutinative, gnomish makes extensive use of particles to show parts of speech (Japanese speakers will know that concept). Sentences also include mood indicators (Is what I'm saying a question, a statement, an order, a wish, a warning?) and certainty indicators (do I know what I'm saying because I saw it, because I deduced it from obvious aftermath, because I was told by someone?)

Phonetically, the language has ended with a relatively short number of consonants (twelve, including two semivowels) that hopefully are distinct enough so that mishearings are not likely. Because of this, the language allows any reasonable approximation as an allophone. As an example, all the following words would mean the same thing to a gnome: Tim, team, tin, dean, ding, thin, and dim.

[ref]

I'm double-posting because I didn't want to make a wall of text.

Gnomish alphabet: The twelve consonants are like follows:

P, as in Pan
T, as in Tan
K, as in Can
N, as in paN
S, as in Saint
F, as in Faint
C, as CH in CHurch
X, as German CH or Spanish J (velar fricative)
R, always vibrating, as in Room
L, as in Loom
Y, as y or ll, as in Yield (semi-consonant)
W, as in Want (semi-consonant)


The vowels are the five vowels you may know, but they're not pronounced like in English. Speakers of pretty much any Latin language or Japanese, will know those by heart.


A, as in pAn
E, as in pEn
I, as in pIn
O, as in pOng
U, as double o in tOOn

[Maximum Zersk]

Interesting, though you may want to change the explanation for the vowels. As far as I can remember, those aren't like Japanese vowels.

[ref]

They're out of order, but they're the right vowels.

[Maximum Zersk]

Huh. Then that means I've been pronouncing pen, pin, and pong wrong.

[Tulio d Bard]

Consonants

Can these be used at any place in the words? Like:


P, as in caP?
T, as in aT?
K, as in looK?
N, as in Nope?
S, as in doeS?
F, as in oF?
C, as in ouCH?
X, as in... I don't think our known languages match... (I believe that's the hardest sound in Portuguese for English speakers to learn)
R, as in... can it be somehow at the end of any word?
L, as in... same as above...
Y, as in saY?
W, as in coW?



The vowels are the five vowels you may know, but they're not pronounced like in English. Speakers of pretty much any Latin language or Japanese, will know those by heart.

Interesting, though you may want to change the explanation for the vowels. As far as I can remember, those aren't like Japanese vowels.

Huh. Then that means I've been pronouncing pen, pin, and pong wrong.

I don't know if the vowels are like that in Japanese, but in Portuguese an Latin (Latin languages) that's pretty right.

[ref]

Yes, consonants can be at the end, but there's no clusters, when two consonants are together, to avoid mispronunciation they tend to add a small pause: "ap-titude", to make it clear. When writing, there is no necessary addition. However, I don't think Y and W can be at the end. At that position it seems better to make them a full vowel... What do you guys thing?

[Maximum Zersk]

Looks good so far. Don't stop! :smalltongue:

[ref]

Sorry, I've been quite busy these days. Any way.

Sentence construction and word order: Thanks to the particle system, the word order is quite flexible. However, there are guidelines in what is the expected word order, and deviating from that is usually done for emphasis.

Since you want to remove ambiguity, the idea is giving the most important info from the start, and as the sentence goes, the importance diminishes. Thus, the verb is the first thing to go. For emphasis on some other part, however, the verb can come second. (This verb-first order matches Sharlaq, which helps us define the proto-language a bit, if/when we get to this).

The different parts of speech will be preceded by a particle which shows its function. Particles are short words that make the Gnomish sentences go into sort of a rhythm.

Example (with English words). How would the sentence "You ate apples yesterday" look?

Verb first. Verbs have an optional particle, which is only used in case something comes first. The next important thing is deemed the subject. Then the direct object (apples). Then the time. Therefore:

Ate (sub) You (direct) Apples (time) Yesterday. That is the standard form. (Note that the verb is in past form, so "yesterday" is only especificating, as opposed to "you ate apples [some time in the past]" (more about verbal tenses in a later post.

(direct) Apples (verb) Ate (sub) You (time) Yesterday. => You ate apples yesterday (not oranges).
(time) Yesterday (verb) Ate (sub) You (direct) Apples. => You ate apples yesterday (not past week). And so on.

[Maximum Zersk]

That's pretty good! One thing, though. Are you going to make it Nominative-Accusative, or Ergative-Absolutive, or something else?

[ref]

(splitting post to make it more readable)

Mood and Certainty indicators. These are two special sets of small words (though not technically particles) that give more information about our sentence. What if I didn't know whether you ate apples yesterday? I would just needed to ask the mood indicator of question. (i.e., Interrogative) at the beginning of the sentence. The most common ones are the stating facts (often omitted during speak, as it is the default), looking for information (interrogative), denying what is said next (that's how you do the negative) or showing surprise about something, but of course, there are several more.

Certainty indicators can be added to the end of the sentence if one thinks that it is important to show the certainty (or lack thereof) one has about the sentence just spoke. They range from absolute certainty (for instance, because I saw the thing myself), to almost absolute (a deduction: Streets are wet, so it must have rained), to not so good certainty (for instance, by hearsay. I heard someone say that there was a fire in the north forest, but I don't know for sure), to stating a mere opinion (I think that this book is great), to no certainty at all (Well, if I have to make a stab in the dark, I'd guess that...)

Well, since I don't want to make long posts, I'm waiting now for more comments and questions and stuff.

[ref]

Well, since the particles are the one carrying the cases, the system goes with them, and since the main drive is resolving ambiguity, the result is that Gnomish becomes "ergative-accusative".

[Maximum Zersk]

That sounds great!

Well, the whole thing looks good. I like it, really.

[Tulio d Bard]

I know nothing about particle languages, so, how are verb times, persons, numbers, genders, etc. defined? Do they use particles to specify that, or some letter(s) in the end/beginning of the word?

[Maximum Zersk]

I know nothing about particle languages, so, how are verb times, persons, numbers, genders, etc. defined? Do they use particles to specify that, or some letter(s) in the end/beginning of the word?

I don't know about other languages, but if I remember correctly, Japanese doesn't have numbers. Not sure about the other things, though.

[unosarta]

I don't know about other languages, but if I remember correctly, Japanese doesn't have numbers. Not sure about the other things, though.

Finally, I get to talk about Japanese on this forum. :smallbiggrin:

Also, this is really awesome, and I don't have that much experience in linguistics in general, but if you guys are talking about particles, I can kind of sort of help. Indeed, it is true, Japanese does not have a number particle.

Really, the first thing to be done should be a set number of particles. I would go higher than Japanese even (which has something close to 14, if you count unused particles), if Gnomish is going for a very "scientific" feel for it (I.E. less misunderstanding via syntax and the lexicon). Actually, Japanese might be a bad thing to base this on, at least for matters of respect. Just for the syntax would be fine, but the respect and honor that comes from Japanese just might be wonky. It is really hard to communicate in a language that has a large amount of variation amongst the way it communicates respect, such as in Japanese, where I could say something like: この水を飲みませんか？(Would you like to drink this water), as opposed to この水飲めよ！(drink the water!).　この水を召しあがりませんか？(Would you like to drink this most honorable water [not a direct translation, but as close as I can get it at]) At the most formal.

Generally, it makes it much harder to learn (And therefore teach, which would be important for Gnomes trying to teach it to non-Gnomes, if they are trying to accumulate knowledge [of course, I digress, I haven't really read much of the actual Conworld thread]), and also tends to separate people across boundaries of respect, which, given the circumstances, does not seem very correct for the culture of the gnomes (as in actual fields of science, where all people are supposed to be considered equal). Having one person put above another tends to lead to conflict, which does not, more science make. :smallamused:

Still, this is great. I can't wait to see what you guys do! Sharlaq itself is a really fun language, if a little hard to speak.

Also, excuse the keigo I used, if anyone knows more Japanese than I do, I am not altogether the most proficient with Keigo. :smallfrown:

[Tulio d Bard]

Finally, I get to talk about Japanese on this forum. :smallbiggrin:

Also, this is really awesome, and I don't have that much experience in linguistics in general, but if you guys are talking about particles, I can kind of sort of help. Indeed, it is true, Japanese does not have a number particle.

Welcome, then! We're not language specialists either (I guess), but we use the languages we know (and wikipedia :smalltongue:) to work with this.


Really, the first thing to be done should be a set number of particles. I would go higher than Japanese even (which has something close to 14, if you count unused particles), if Gnomish is going for a very "scientific" feel for it (I.E. less misunderstanding via syntax and the lexicon). Actually, Japanese might be a bad thing to base this on, at least for matters of respect. Just for the syntax would be fine, but the respect and honor that comes from Japanese just might be wonky. It is really hard to communicate in a language that has a large amount of variation amongst the way it communicates respect, such as in Japanese, where I could say something like: この水を飲みませんか？(Would you like to drink this water), as opposed to この水飲めよ！(drink the water!).　この水を召しあがりませんか？(Would you like to drink this most honorable water [not a direct translation, but as close as I can get it at]) At the most formal.

I believe we're using the syntax of it. As you said, respect isn't a main trait of our Gnomes. But it's the only reference we have (guessing again). Yeah, "scientific" feel.


Generally, it makes it much harder to learn (And therefore teach, which would be important for Gnomes trying to teach it to non-Gnomes, if they are trying to accumulate knowledge [of course, I digress, I haven't really read much of the actual Conworld thread]), and also tends to separate people across boundaries of respect, which, given the circumstances, does not seem very correct for the culture of the gnomes (as in actual fields of science, where all people are supposed to be considered equal). Having one person put above another tends to lead to conflict, which does not, more science make. :smallamused:

You got it right, except that Gnomes are ruled by an Emperor. We mmay need to give it some specific treatment particles, but I'm not sure.


Still, this is great. I can't wait to see what you guys do! Sharlaq itself is a really fun language, if a little hard to speak.

:smallbiggrin:

[unosarta]

Welcome, then! We're not language specialists either (I guess), but we use the languages we know (and wikipedia :smalltongue:) to work with this.
Still, this is great. All I really know besides english is Japanese and a little chinese, but I would love to try to help.



I believe we're using the syntax of it. As you said, respect isn't a main trait of our Gnomes. But it's the only reference we have (guessing again). Yeah, "scientific" feel.
All of the syntax, or just the particles? Not having done very much study on neurolinguistics, I think it still might be interesting to consider exactly the implications of syntax on culture and social thinking. Most languages are created as a way to arrange, process and subsequently propose and speak, thoughts, so most often, it seems that syntax has a great impact on the culture of the peoples that speak it. For instance, from my meager and altogether too small experience with language (I am working on fixing that :smallwink:), most SVO languages focus on the self, rather than others (as indicated, with the subject coming first in the syntax), and then the actions that one is doing, and then the consequences and the things that one is affecting by doing the action (which has been demonstrated by many an english speaker on multiple occasions, but again, these are just sort of educated guesses, neurolinguistics is not a very well studied field, as opposed to many other linguistics fields).

SOV seems to categorize more with, thinking of the self, and then of the ones upon the actions you are doing affect, and then upon the actions themselves, which leads to slower action, more thought on the matter, and more study into what you are doing (as what happens often time in Japanese), as well as a higher motivation to think about others first (especially in Japanese). Thusly, if these are true (and for all I know, they aren't), one could theorize that the opposites would be true; OSV would have an even higher importance placed upon others, and a slightly less significant importance placed upon the self, and of the actions one is taking (which might lead to a people who are very cautious, and very aware of others). Japanese syntax would apply just fine to the Gnomes, as far as I can tell, but with these conjectures, the Sharlaq culture might be invariably different. If the Sharlaq are VSO, then they might have a very alien and strange outlook on life when compared to the Gnomes, linguistically and otherwise. Think about it this way; the Sharlaq would be placing action and self above others. They would be more individualized, and more self respecting. This does seem to clash with the image I had seen myself for the Sharlaq. But, of course, I could be wrong (and quite likely am), and even if these conjectures did prove to be true (which would certainly be hard to prove), then the Sharlaq still might be some sort of strange outlier. But either way, the two languages having so huge a difference would be a big mitigation in diplomacy and trade, and they would have to have some other way that their language has the same roots, probably. Of course, they could have the same alphabet, or character system if they are going pictorial (which I would not recommend for ease of use and for the fact that many would likely go insane from all of the work needed to make all of the characters necessary in order to make it a functional system, especially for the Gnomes. For a bit of perspective, just to be able to function, in Japan, which is partial phonetic partial pictorial, one must know at least 2000 characters. In china, that is 15,000-20,000. Yeah...).

WOAH, WALL OF TEXT!


You got it right, except that Gnomes are ruled by an Emperor. We mmay need to give it some specific treatment particles, but I'm not sure.
Hm, that could be interesting. An emperor, as in, with nobility, or not? If yes, then a different particle for nobility wouldn't be that hard, and something like o- in Japanese, as a suffix, applied to something to make it of the emperor, could be added to the particle. Actually, that might be interesting anyway, to have a suffix that is possessive to the emperor only. :smallbiggrin:



:smallbiggrin:
It is really cool, even just linguistically. I love the idea and implementation of the Sharlaq.

[Maximum Zersk]

All of the syntax, or just the particles? Not having done very much study on neurolinguistics, I think it still might be interesting to consider exactly the implications of syntax on culture and social thinking. Most languages are created as a way to arrange, process and subsequently propose and speak, thoughts, so most often, it seems that syntax has a great impact on the culture of the peoples that speak it. For instance, from my meager and altogether too small experience with language (I am working on fixing that :smallwink:), most SVO languages focus on the self, rather than others (as indicated, with the subject coming first in the syntax), and then the actions that one is doing, and then the consequences and the things that one is affecting by doing the action (which has been demonstrated by many an english speaker on multiple occasions, but again, these are just sort of educated guesses, neurolinguistics is not a very well studied field, as opposed to many other linguistics fields).

SOV seems to categorize more with, thinking of the self, and then of the ones upon the actions you are doing affect, and then upon the actions themselves, which leads to slower action, more thought on the matter, and more study into what you are doing (as what happens often time in Japanese), as well as a higher motivation to think about others first (especially in Japanese). Thusly, if these are true (and for all I know, they aren't), one could theorize that the opposites would be true; OSV would have an even higher importance placed upon others, and a slightly less significant importance placed upon the self, and of the actions one is taking (which might lead to a people who are very cautious, and very aware of others). Japanese syntax would apply just fine to the Gnomes, as far as I can tell, but with these conjectures, the Sharlaq culture might be invariably different. If the Sharlaq are VSO, then they might have a very alien and strange outlook on life when compared to the Gnomes, linguistically and otherwise. Think about it this way; the Sharlaq would be placing action and self above others. They would be more individualized, and more self respecting. This does seem to clash with the image I had seen myself for the Sharlaq. But, of course, I could be wrong (and quite likely am), and even if these conjectures did prove to be true (which would certainly be hard to prove), then the Sharlaq still might be some sort of strange outlier. But either way, the two languages having so huge a difference would be a big mitigation in diplomacy and trade, and they would have to have some other way that their language has the same roots, probably. Of course, they could have the same alphabet, or character system if they are going pictorial (which I would not recommend for ease of use and for the fact that many would likely go insane from all of the work needed to make all of the characters necessary in order to make it a functional system, especially for the Gnomes. For a bit of perspective, just to be able to function, in Japan, which is partial phonetic partial pictorial, one must know at least 2000 characters. In china, that is 15,000-20,000. Yeah...).


The thing is, there are languages that are VSO. The people who are native speakers aren't very alien, so I don't think it's a problem.

An Idealogical, and Pictorial font wouldn't be impossible. The thing is that Kanji is made up of a bunch of radicals and compound characters that make new words. Oh, it'd be hard, I'm not denying that. But it wouldn't be too hard.

Also, I'm already insane, so I don't have to worry about that. :smalltongue:

[unosarta]

The thing is, there are languages that are VSO. The people who are native speakers aren't very alien, so I don't think it's a problem.
Hm, I suppose you are right. Although, with the way pronunciation works with Sharlaq, it might seem foreign to the Gnomes anyway. Also, are you guys planning on doing "Human"? If so, one way to increasingly differentiate it from Gnomish (which would appear to be increasingly longer and longer, which is saying something, when compared to Sharlaq, which is already pretty long, sentence wise), may be to have it be really, really short. So, the Humans tend to mess things up, miscommunicate, and start wars, fights and escalating conflicts. They might even solve this by magic (if their magic is sufficiently advanced, I really should go read the actual world thread) via telepathy, or some other similar ability, allowing the more powerful mages to solve disputes and act like judges, increasing the respect the Humans have for them even further. It could be a potentially interesting idea.


An Idealogical, and Pictorial font wouldn't be impossible. The thing is that Kanji is made up of a bunch of radicals and compound characters that make new words. Oh, it'd be hard, I'm not denying that. But it wouldn't be too hard.
It might. And, honestly, kanji itself is hard to learn. If the Gnomes are really going to be attempting to reach out to other cultures, they would want to have not only a pictorial system (which is a pain in the ass to learn). Hm... Maybe they have both? Like a science only Pictorial script, and a daily life phonetic alphabet? That would be very interesting. Also, it would allow them to still have a sort of similar common root with Sharlaq; the same alphabet system. The Pictorial alphabet would be only used by scientists or those who are highly educated, and might have been created by the scientists specifically for their work (pictorial systems tend to have far fewer ambiguities, when every word has a specific meaning. Unless it is Japanese, where often as not, a character will have multiple meanings. :smallannoyed:).


Also, I'm already insane, so I don't have to worry about that. :smalltongue:
I assumed so, for doing so huge a project like this. :smalltongue:

[Maximum Zersk]

Hm, I suppose you are right. Although, with the way pronunciation works with Sharlaq, it might seem foreign to the Gnomes anyway. Also, are you guys planning on doing "Human"? If so, one way to increasingly differentiate it from Gnomish (which would appear to be increasingly longer and longer, which is saying something, when compared to Sharlaq, which is already pretty long, sentence wise), may be to have it be really, really short. So, the Humans tend to mess things up, miscommunicate, and start wars, fights and escalating conflicts. They might even solve this by magic (if their magic is sufficiently advanced, I really should go read the actual world thread) via telepathy, or some other similar ability, allowing the more powerful mages to solve disputes and act like judges, increasing the respect the Humans have for them even further. It could be a potentially interesting idea.


Well, my guess is that there are going to be three different language trees, one for each of the human ethnicities. It might be neat as short, but I'd see about how we'd do that. I guess that would be an isolated language, one that relies more on word order and grammar than morphology and infixes.



It might. And, honestly, kanji itself is hard to learn. If the Gnomes are really going to be attempting to reach out to other cultures, they would want to have not only a pictorial system (which is a pain in the ass to learn). Hm... Maybe they have both? Like a science only Pictorial script, and a daily life phonetic alphabet? That would be very interesting. Also, it would allow them to still have a sort of similar common root with Sharlaq; the same alphabet system. The Pictorial alphabet would be only used by scientists or those who are highly educated, and might have been created by the scientists specifically for their work (pictorial systems tend to have far fewer ambiguities, when every word has a specific meaning. Unless it is Japanese, where often as not, a character will have multiple meanings. :smallannoyed:).


Heh, I know. I learned a bit of japanese, and man, that's a lot of characters.

Eh, who knows. Writing scripts come later on, when we've finished individual languages.



I assumed so, for doing so huge a project like this. :smalltongue:

Heh, you ain't seen nothing yet. :smallamused:

[unosarta]

Well, my guess is that there are going to be three different language trees, one for each of the human ethnicities. It might be neat as short, but I'd see about how we'd do that. I guess that would be an isolated language, one that relies more on word order and grammar than morphology and infixes.
OK, I can see that. Also, the Wiki really needs to get a better format. Something linking all of the pages under subcategories. Otherwise, it is really hard to navigate. Speaking of a language that relies more on word order and grammar, have you guys thought about lojban? It is at the very least, an interesting concept not unique (I am fairly confident that some form of syntax tense exists in German). That would be another interesting thing to combine and tinker with.


Heh, I know. I learned a bit of japanese, and man, that's a lot of characters.
You have no id-- well, you probably have some idea. :smalleek: It is actually worse than Chinese, because in Chinese, at the very least, you do not have words that have multiple meanings, with one character. It can become a huge pain in the butt. Of course, Chinese also has tones, which are a pain simply because for non-native speakers they are more of a hassle than anything else (especially considering Chinese grammar, which is really simple, with only 2 particles, and the same syntax as English! A nice break from Japanese, at the very least).


Eh, who knows. Writing scripts come later on, when we've finished individual languages.
That is probably the best way to go about it. I was just thinking of the possibly systems that might apply to each, even if it is before the final decision.



Heh, you ain't seen nothing yet. :smallamused:
I await patiently. :smallwink:

[Maximum Zersk]

OK, I can see that. Also, the Wiki really needs to get a better format. Something linking all of the pages under subcategories. Otherwise, it is really hard to navigate. Speaking of a language that relies more on word order and grammar, have you guys thought about lojban? It is at the very least, an interesting concept not unique (I am fairly confident that some form of syntax tense exists in German). That would be another interesting thing to combine and tinker with.


Ah, yeah. For now, all of the pages are in the Category browse, which is at the bottom of the page.

I have heard of Lojban, though not much.



You have no id-- well, you probably have some idea. :smalleek: It is actually worse than Chinese, because in Chinese, at the very least, you do not have words that have multiple meanings, with one character. It can become a huge pain in the butt. Of course, Chinese also has tones, which are a pain simply because for non-native speakers they are more of a hassle than anything else (especially considering Chinese grammar, which is really simple, with only 2 particles, and the same syntax as English! A nice break from Japanese, at the very least).


Huh, I thought japanese had tones as well. Not matter.

Heh, yeah, I have heard about the simplicity of the grammar. :smalltongue:
That is probably the best way to go about it. I was just thinking of the possibly systems that might apply to each, even if it is before the final decision.



I await patiently. :smallwink:

Of course. :smallamused:

[unosarta]

Ah, yeah. For now, all of the pages are in the Category browse, which is at the bottom of the page.
Ah, I see. That would explain my confusion, being only 3 pages long, so far. :smalltongue:


I have heard of Lojban, though not much.
It is pretty interesting. Basically (wikipedia will be more comprehensive, I don't know all that much about it either), the tenses are based on the syntax. So, SVO could be past tense, and OVS could be future tense (Just as an example). Also, this reminds me, one idea I was having for Sharlaq might be the removal of the present tense entirely. If you think about it, when someone is talking about something, it is already in the past, and for such a past oriented people, it isn't that much of a stretch.


Huh, I thought japanese had tones as well. Not matter.
HAHA, no. Japanese has entirely no tone, and no intentional inflection, usually. It is almost the opposite of Chinese (a huge amount of conjugation, lots of particles, at least partial phonetic, non-toned, several unpronounceable syllables [Ra, re, ru, ri, ro, as an example], different syntax. The only thing that is really similar is Kanji, and because of simplified chinese, most kanji don't apply either).


Heh, yeah, I have heard about the simplicity of the grammar. :smalltongue:
That is probably the best way to go about it. I was just thinking of the possibly systems that might apply to each, even if it is before the final decision.
It is wonderful, when compared to Japanese. Of course, no conjugation can lead to some confusion and miscommunication, but at least it is easy to learn. Although, for me personally, I think Japanese syntax, grammar, pronunciation and, well, everything, is at the very least more intuitive than English, maybe slightly more so than Chinese. But of course, that is my own thought on the matter.



Of course. :smallamused:
Hm. So, I have nothing further to respond to, so I think a table is in order.

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme

Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)

Gnomish, high|SOV|Scientific, used in academic/court settings

Gnomish, low|???|Used by the common people

Human (branch 1)|???| ???

Human (branch 2)|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person[/table]

[Maximum Zersk]

It is pretty interesting. Basically (wikipedia will be more comprehensive, I don't know all that much about it either), the tenses are based on the syntax. So, SVO could be past tense, and OVS could be future tense (Just as an example). Also, this reminds me, one idea I was having for Sharlaq might be the removal of the present tense entirely. If you think about it, when someone is talking about something, it is already in the past, and for such a past oriented people, it isn't that much of a stretch.


Hm. Interesting.

I don't know. We could remove the past tense, but remember that this is a proto-language that's currently up, and later languages that evolve from it may not have it. So we'll see.



HAHA, no. Japanese has entirely no tone, and no intentional inflection, usually. It is almost the opposite of Chinese (a huge amount of conjugation, lots of particles, at least partial phonetic, non-toned, several unpronounceable syllables [Ra, re, ru, ri, ro, as an example], different syntax. The only thing that is really similar is Kanji, and because of simplified chinese, most kanji don't apply either).
[QUOTE]

Huh. That's amusing, considering that they're in the same language group, I think.

[QUOTE]
It is wonderful, when compared to Japanese. Of course, no conjugation can lead to some confusion and miscommunication, but at least it is easy to learn. Although, for me personally, I think Japanese syntax, grammar, pronunciation and, well, everything, is at the very least more intuitive than English, maybe slightly more so than Chinese. But of course, that is my own thought on the matter.


You seem to really dislike Japanese. :smalltongue:



Hm. So, I have nothing further to respond to, so I think a table is in order.

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme

Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)

Gnomish, high|SOV|Scientific, used in academic/court settings

Gnomish, low|???|Used by the common people

Human (branch 1)|???| ???

Human (branch 2)|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person[/table]

That seems good, but there are more language groups you're missing. I'll fill in the blanks.

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme

North River Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)

South River Sharlaq|???|Southern River Sharlaq Language

SeaSharlaq|???|Sea Sharlaq

Gnomish, high|Varied|Scientific, used in academic/court settings

Gnomish, low|Varied, usually VSO|Used by the common people

Human (branch 1)|???| ???

Human (branch 2)|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person[/table]

Also, ref defined Gnomish as having no exact word order, but usually as VSO.

[unosarta]

Hm. Interesting.

I don't know. We could remove the past tense, but remember that this is a proto-language that's currently up, and later languages that evolve from it may not have it. So we'll see.
Ah, well, if it is a proto-language, then I suppose.


Huh. That's amusing, considering that they're in the same language group, I think.
Well, Chinese really is its own language group. There really aren't all that many languages like it, and it strangely hasn't affected all that many other languages closer to it geographically. And Japanese really should be in the south east Asian language grouping, since it is more derived from those languages than Chinese. Additionally, when I say unpronounceable, I mean that it isn't pronounceable in Chinese. Japanese "R"s are hard to pronounce, but they are literally not possible in Chinese. Which is why it is hilarious to ask anyone who is recently learning english, and who is Chinese to say "Umbrella". "um" is not a syllable in Chinese, "Br" is not either, "re" is not, and "la" is not, so you end up with something like: Unbleller. Which just sounds really funny when it is actually said by someone with the accent.



You seem to really dislike Japanese. :smalltongue:
Actually, I love Japanese. It makes way more sense to me than English, and a little bit more sense than English. Japanese is so far my most favorite language.



That seems good, but there are more language groups you're missing. I'll fill in the blanks.

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme

North River Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)

South River Sharlaq|???|Southern River Sharlaq Language

SeaSharlaq|???|Sea Sharlaq

Gnomish, high|Varied|Scientific, used in academic/court settings

Gnomish, low|Varied, usually VSO|Used by the common people

Human (branch 1)|???| ???

Human (branch 2)|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person[/table]

Also, ref defined Gnomish as having no exact word order, but usually as VSO.
Interesting. What are the differences between the different Sharlaq races and language branches?

Also, ref seems to be basing a little bit of the syntax on Lojban, which makes sense seeing as it was originally created so that there was no misunderstandings, or as little as possible with language.

[Maximum Zersk]

Well, Chinese really is its own language group. There really aren't all that many languages like it, and it strangely hasn't affected all that many other languages closer to it geographically. And Japanese really should be in the south east Asian language grouping, since it is more derived from those languages than Chinese. Additionally, when I say unpronounceable, I mean that it isn't pronounceable in Chinese. Japanese "R"s are hard to pronounce, but they are literally not possible in Chinese. Which is why it is hilarious to ask anyone who is recently learning english, and who is Chinese to say "Umbrella". "um" is not a syllable in Chinese, "Br" is not either, "re" is not, and "la" is not, so you end up with something like: Unbleller. Which just sounds really funny when it is actually said by someone with the accent.


Ah. Looking at Wikipedia now says it's actually in the Sinitic language tree, so it isn't even classified as the same language tree.

Well, looking at again, Wikipedia, the Japonic language group, of which Japanese and Ryukyuan languages are in, is either an isolate, or part of the Altaic group, which covers parts of Russia and Central Asia.

And I don't have a problem with phonemes, usually. I generally find it easy pronouncing a lot of them.



Actually, I love Japanese. It makes way more sense to me than English, and a little bit more sense than English. Japanese is so far my most favorite language.


Ah, I see. It's just that the way you were talking about it when you were comparing it with Chinese made me think otherwise. :smalltongue:



Interesting. What are the differences between the different Sharlaq races and language branches?


Well, the Sea Sharlaq are closer to the Ancient Egyptians for now, so their language would be closer to the Semitic Languages, possibly. And There's nothing on the Southern Riverkin yet.



Also, ref seems to be basing a little bit of the syntax on Lojban, which makes sense seeing as it was originally created so that there was no misunderstandings, or as little as possible with language.

Actually, I think he said he's making it a logical conlang, which are a group of conlangs made to be as logical as possible. Lojban is actually one of a group of them.

[unosarta]

Ah. Looking at Wikipedia now says it's actually in the Sinitic language tree, so it isn't even classified as the same language tree.
Actually, I think wikipedia defines Chinese more as Indo-Sinitic, but yeah.


Well, looking at again, Wikipedia, the Japonic language group, of which Japanese and Ryukyuan languages are in, is either an isolate, or part of the Altaic group, which covers parts of Russia and Central Asia.
Reading on the Japonic language family has proved very interesting. I have never even heard of the Ryukyu islands.


And I don't have a problem with phonemes, usually. I generally find it easy pronouncing a lot of them.
Actually, thinking on it now, Chinese has a few hard ones too, like zhi. But I am sort of getting off track. :smallwink:



Ah, I see. It's just that the way you were talking about it when you were comparing it with Chinese made me think otherwise. :smalltongue:
Haha, no. Chinese is honestly worse than Japanese for me because tones are a pain in the ass, although I like working with characters.



Well, the Sea Sharlaq are closer to the Ancient Egyptians for now, so their language would be closer to the Semitic Languages, possibly. And There's nothing on the Southern Riverkin yet.
Hm, OK. I know that it is before development, but are you thinking of having them share an alphabet with the other Sharlaq, or have their own writing system?



Actually, I think he said he's making it a logical conlang, which are a group of conlangs made to be as logical as possible. Lojban is actually one of a group of them.
Interesting... still, from what I know of Lojban, it sounded sort of similar.

[ref]

Whoa, long discussion here. First things first, however. Welcome on board, unosarta.

I am also a student of Japanese. My plan is not taking the whole syntax, as you said, but namely the particle system, expanded to its logical consequences.

If you feel the need of your words coming out respectfully, the key is in the mood indicator.
[mood:order] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Drink this water!)
[mood:request] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Drink this water, please.)
[mood: formal request] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Would you please drink this water here?)

Gnomish is VSO, but with flexibility for emphasis, which allows one to deviate from that. Other than that, the construction is fairly procedural. Particle Speech Particle Speech Particle Speech... so learning Gnomish can be a long process, but at least you're not ridden with exceptions, and exceptions to the exceptions, and so on...

Ideally, Gnomish ends up being "logical natural", that is, we're not taking the logical to the extreme, with a language that ends up looking like a programming language. This is supposed to have evolved from the same proto-language that Sharlaq, but with emphasis soon put on the removal of ambiguities.

[unosarta]

Whoa, long discussion here. First things first, however. Welcome on board, unosarta.
Yeah, we kind of got side tracked. :smallwink:
Thanks! This is really cool, for what it is worth.


I am also a student of Japanese. My plan is not taking the whole syntax, as you said, but namely the particle system, expanded to its logical consequences.
Nice! Ah, that would work. Japanese particles are part of what I really like about the language, I can almost always tell exactly what the speaker means within context, given by the particle. That would probably work very well for the feel of Gnomish that I am getting. Also, by "Expand to its logical consequences," do you mean add more, or simply adapt right from Japanese? Also, having thought about it now, one way you could take it, would be instead of conjugating the verb, in Gnomish, you could conjugate the particle that affects the verb. Just an idea.


If you feel the need of your words coming out respectfully, the key is in the mood indicator.
[mood:order] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Drink this water!)
[mood:request] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Drink this water, please.)
[mood: formal request] Drink (sub) you (direct) water (loc) near. (Would you please drink this water here?)
Interesting. So, mood indicators come at the beginning of the sentence? OK. Also, I think that would be a good separation from Japanese, where the longer the sentence is, the more respect is given, in general.


Gnomish is VSO, but with flexibility for emphasis, which allows one to deviate from that. Other than that, the construction is fairly procedural. Particle Speech Particle Speech Particle Speech... so learning Gnomish can be a long process, but at least you're not ridden with exceptions, and exceptions to the exceptions, and so on...
I can imagine that particles would certainly make that possible. Also, no exceptions would be very helpful. :smallwink:


Ideally, Gnomish ends up being "logical natural", that is, we're not taking the logical to the extreme, with a language that ends up looking like a programming language. This is supposed to have evolved from the same proto-language that Sharlaq, but with emphasis soon put on the removal of ambiguities.
Ah, OK, so it is still "natural". That implies that a lot of changes have happened to Gnomish, while relatively few have happened to the Sharlaq, as from what I can tell (since the original proto-language is not available, unless the above Sharlaq that Maximum Zersk has been making is the original proto-language).

So, I was wondering. Have you any thoughts on the actual scripts for Gnomish? I would like to update the table that Maximum Zersk made above to include some sort of possible ideas on the alphabets of each. I was thinking that the High Gnomish language might have a pictorial system, so as to remove even more discrepancies and misunderstandings via language, especially seeing as most advanced, or semi-advanced scientific powers that have appeared in actual history have relied fairly heavily on writing, in order to preserve their ideas, so it stands to reason that the Gnomes might too. And pictorial systems do offer, usually, less discrepancies in reading.

Any thoughts?

[Edit]: Tables! :smallbiggrin:

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme|Writing System

North River Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)|???

South River Sharlaq|???|Southern River Sharlaq Language|???

SeaSharlaq|???|Sea Sharlaq|???

Gnomish, high|Varied|Scientific, used in academic/court settings|Maybe pictorial?

Gnomish, low|Varied, usually VSO|Used by the common people|???

Human (branch 1)|???| ???|???

Human (branch 2)|???|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person|Probably none[/table]

[Maximum Zersk]

Ah, OK, so it is still "natural". That implies that a lot of changes have happened to Gnomish, while relatively few have happened to the Sharlaq, as from what I can tell (since the original proto-language is not available, unless the above Sharlaq that Maximum Zersk has been making is the original proto-language).


Heh, yeah, it is. Basically, it's from the point in time where that language and the Sea Sharlaq Language were noticably different, but before they split into different languages.

[unosarta]

Heh, yeah, it is. Basically, it's from the point in time where that language and the Sea Sharlaq Language were noticably different, but before they split into different languages.

Hm, OK, that changes somethings. Oo! Maybe at this point, Sharlaq didn't have a script! This would explain what they have a tense for ancient history (needing to remember it, without having an actual way to write it down), and also why the more modern Sharlaq and Gnomish do not share a script; they developed it after the split, when they went their collective separate ways, as races. That could be interesting.

So, this is North River Sharlaq, that we are talking about? Or is that a more evolved language?

[Maximum Zersk]

Hm, OK, that changes somethings. Oo! Maybe at this point, Sharlaq didn't have a script! This would explain what they have a tense for ancient history (needing to remember it, without having an actual way to write it down), and also why the more modern Sharlaq and Gnomish do not share a script; they developed it after the split, when they went their collective separate ways, as races. That could be interesting.

So, this is North River Sharlaq, that we are talking about? Or is that a more evolved language?

North River Sharlaq. It's going to develop into multiple different languages later. We're going by the tree model here, I think.

[unosarta]

North River Sharlaq. It's going to develop into multiple different languages later. We're going by the tree model here, I think.

OK. You might not want to add anything else, then, since it will be easier to adapt and add to if it is sort of bare bones. Hm. So, does the idea of not having a script pass? Or do you want them to have a simplified alphabet?

[Maximum Zersk]

No script right now. Though I may have an idea for a featural alphabet (like Hangul) for later.

[unosarta]

No script right now. Though I may have an idea for a featural alphabet (like Hangul) for later.

OK. I am sort of confused by the Wikipedia entry, but as far as I can tell, each symbol is sort of like a radical, with a pronunciation? So, you could combine three into one symbol, in order to make a phoneme? Correct me if I am wrong.

That would be very interesting.

[Maximum Zersk]

OK. I am sort of confused by the Wikipedia entry, but as far as I can tell, each symbol is sort of like a radical, with a pronunciation? So, you could combine three into one symbol, in order to make a phoneme? Correct me if I am wrong.

That would be very interesting.

Well, the way it works, each radical is a phoneme, yes. And when you put them together, you get a syllable. So each character is one syllable.

[unosarta]

Well, the way it works, each radical is a phoneme, yes. And when you put them together, you get a syllable. So each character is one syllable.

Interesting. That seems a little bit advanced for a proto-language to me. :smallamused:

[Maximum Zersk]

Heh, yeah. So I'm probably going to keep it for later.

[unosarta]

Heh, yeah. So I'm probably going to keep it for later.

OK. Hm. I have no idea about what else to talk about, until Ref comments on the idea of conjugated particles, so I am going to make a table! :smallbiggrin:

Or, at least, copy a table, and add more data.

{table=head]Language|Syntax|Theme|Writing System

North River Sharlaq|VSO|River People (reflections in language)|None/Featural Alphabet

South River Sharlaq|???|Southern River Sharlaq Language|???

SeaSharlaq|SVO/VSO/VOS|Sea Sharlaq|???

Gnomish, high|Varied|Scientific, used in academic/court settings|Maybe pictorial?

Gnomish, low|Varied, usually VSO|Used by the common people|Probably phonetic alphabet

Human (Native American/First Nation)|SOV/OSV| ???|???

Human (branch 2)|???|???|???

Human (branch 3)|???|???|???

Thoughtspeech?|???|Used by powerful mages to understand the thought processes of others. Possibly a personal based language, depending person to person|Probably none[/table]

So. Are you considering the North River Sharlaq complete, or does it still need some work (syntax wise, it could probably use a few more words, but that can be dealt with later)? If so, any ideas on how to deal with Sea Sharlaq and South River Sharlaq? Also, is there a map for the locations where they live, and has there been any progress on the creation of culture for the humans?

[Maximum Zersk]

North River-kin probably needs some polishing, but for now, it's okay.

For the Sea Sharlaq Language, it's going to be a bit similar to North Riverkin, but still a few noticible differences. First of all, that'd mean it would probably be a similar word order. So either VSO, SVO, or VOS. And the syllable structure might be the same. I'm thinking maybe something like (C[something])V(C). I'll have to thing up the phonemes.

For the humans, the culture of one of them was going to be close to Native American/First Nations. No idea which group it'd be similar to, though. But that'd mean that their language would possibly be Tripartite. Maybe they'd be SOV, or OSV. Their language would be quite different than the Gnomes and the Sharlaq. Not sure about the other two groups yet, though.

[unosarta]

North River-kin probably needs some polishing, but for now, it's okay.
OK.


For the Sea Sharlaq Language, it's going to be a bit similar to North Riverkin, but still a few noticible differences. First of all, that'd mean it would probably be a similar word order. So either VSO, SVO, or VOS. And the syllable structure might be the same. I'm thinking maybe something like (C[something])V(C). I'll have to think up the phonemes.
OK, the table is updated, in the post above, since reposting the table seems kind of weird/pointless.


For the humans, the culture of one of them was going to be close to Native American/First Nations. No idea which group it'd be similar to, though. But that'd mean that their language would possibly be Tripartite. Maybe they'd be SOV, or OSV. Their language would be quite different than the Gnomes and the Sharlaq. Not sure about the other two groups yet, though.
OK, table is updated with possible syntax for the first branch.

[Tulio d Bard]

:smalleek:

That thing about VSO for Sarlaq language was thought exactly because it emphasised their actions. But at that time I thought they were agressive. If you guys want to change it, I suggest that, instead of changing the order itself, make it SeaSharlaq language. Or, like it is now, proto-language, allowing us to change it when it comes to River Croc Language itself. Probably VSO for SeaSharlaq (agressive), OVS/OSV for River Sharlaq (both of them? - family oriented people), Gnomish may vary and no idea for the Humans, as I see it.

I personally don't like that Thoughtspeech. We're trying to keep it low-magic level and I don't see why they would use another language if they did speak throught thoughts.

unosarta, you may want to check this site (http://www.omniglot.com/), as you seem very interested in scripts. I don't remember if I mentioned it before, so the sugestion's also valid to everyone else.

[Maximum Zersk]

Omniglot's a pretty cool site. It gives information about languages and scripts and doesn't afraid of anything.
:smalltongue:

Well, we'll see about the word order. There are actually quite a few languages that are VSO, and the native speakers aren't really that much more violent than everybody else.

[unosarta]

:smalleek:
Yeah, it is quite a lot. :smallwink:


That thing about VSO for Sarlaq language was thought exactly because it emphasised their actions. But at that time I thought they were agressive. If you guys want to change it, I suggest that, instead of changing the order itself, make it SeaSharlaq language. Or, like it is now, proto-language, allowing us to change it when it comes to River Croc Language itself. Probably VSO for SeaSharlaq (agressive), OVS/OSV for River Sharlaq (both of them? - family oriented people), Gnomish may vary and no idea for the Humans, as I see it.
I like the idea that the Sea Sharlaq are more aggressive than their river counterparts, the sea being a far more hostile environment in general than


I personally don't like that Thoughtspeech. We're trying to keep it low-magic level and I don't see why they would use another language if they did speak throught thoughts.
The thing about thoughts is, nobody knows anything about how they work. As humans, we are limited to human communications, and human interactions, and more importantly, human words. When I think of something, in a more generalized, non-specific way, I tend to associate colors. This allows me to create connections between different subjects via color, subconsciously. This is a fact that I have only recently come to realize, and it is striking. I can understand the reasoning behind disliking Thoughtspeech, and the way it is written up is probably wrong for what is attempting to be said. Thoughtspeech wouldn't be so much personalized, as varying depending on the way the person thinks. The point is, if I think in color, but another person thinks in shapes, then you have to have a different language for them. Because thought is so much less limiting and limited when compared to words, it isn't necessarily a language, in the sense that you can't learn it in a school. Only through understanding a persons mind, through intense years of study, and personal sacrifices (political sacrifices, social sacrifices, family and emotional sacrifices) would a person be able to truly communicate with a mind. Even then, almost all communication would be hazy and indistinct. If you knew someone for years, and years, you still might not understand their thoughts, even if you were to study them the entire time. The thing about thoughts is, they are most often faster than most people have the capability of perceiving. Most people use those connections mentioned earlier, via patterns, colors, shapes or a multitude of other such ways, in order to condense, and speed up thoughts. This is what has probably led humans to be such a varied and evolved species. I can understand that one would not want mind reading, but this is actually a step away from most mind reading in the classical fantasy sense; it is far, far harder to be a mind reader in this case than it is in most other fantasy settings, and one has to make many, many sacrifices just to come to the level that they can communicate with another person. This adds another level of social interaction to those few who are able to read minds at all, and then communicate with them.

TL;DR: Thoughtspeech is an attempt at a more realistic version of mind reading. Of course, those neurosciences things that I am talking about are not based on what I have researched, or what I know for fact; only what I have observed within my own mind. Interpret this as you will. :smallsmile:


unosarta, you may want to check this site (http://www.omniglot.com/), as you seem very interested in scripts. I don't remember if I mentioned it before, so the sugestion's also valid to everyone else.
I love writing systems, and that is a very, very cool link. Thanks!


Omniglot's a pretty cool site. It gives information about languages and scripts and doesn't afraid of anything.
:smalltongue:
I think you just won something. Not that there was a contest, or anything.


Well, we'll see about the word order. There are actually quite a few languages that are VSO, and the native speakers aren't really that much more violent than everybody else.
Well, it is less aggressive than action oriented, most likely. Of course, I am only interpreting what I am think about the matter, but it seems that aggression stems not necessarily from a thought process, but from emotion, which is very hard to control, at least compared to such thought processes.

[Maximum Zersk]

The thing about thoughts is, nobody knows anything about how they work. As humans, we are limited to human communications, and human interactions, and more importantly, human words. When I think of something, in a more generalized, non-specific way, I tend to associate colors. This allows me to create connections between different subjects via color, subconsciously. This is a fact that I have only recently come to realize, and it is striking. I can understand the reasoning behind disliking Thoughtspeech, and the way it is written up is probably wrong for what is attempting to be said. Thoughtspeech wouldn't be so much personalized, as varying depending on the way the person thinks. The point is, if I think in color, but another person thinks in shapes, then you have to have a different language for them. Because thought is so much less limiting and limited when compared to words, it isn't necessarily a language, in the sense that you can't learn it in a school. Only through understanding a persons mind, through intense years of study, and personal sacrifices (political sacrifices, social sacrifices, family and emotional sacrifices) would a person be able to truly communicate with a mind. Even then, almost all communication would be hazy and indistinct. If you knew someone for years, and years, you still might not understand their thoughts, even if you were to study them the entire time. The thing about thoughts is, they are most often faster than most people have the capability of perceiving. Most people use those connections mentioned earlier, via patterns, colors, shapes or a multitude of other such ways, in order to condense, and speed up thoughts. This is what has probably led humans to be such a varied and evolved species. I can understand that one would not want mind reading, but this is actually a step away from most mind reading in the classical fantasy sense; it is far, far harder to be a mind reader in this case than it is in most other fantasy settings, and one has to make many, many sacrifices just to come to the level that they can communicate with another person. This adds another level of social interaction to those few who are able to read minds at all, and then communicate with them.

TL;DR: Thoughtspeech is an attempt at a more realistic version of mind reading. Of course, those neurosciences things that I am talking about are not based on what I have researched, or what I know for fact; only what I have observed within my own mind. Interpret this as you will. :smallsmile:


In other words, SCIENCE!



I think you just won something. Not that there was a contest, or anything.


I do that from time to time.



Well, it is less aggressive than action oriented, most likely. Of course, I am only interpreting what I am think about the matter, but it seems that aggression stems not necessarily from a thought process, but from emotion, which is very hard to control, at least compared to such thought processes.

Ah, hm. Well, that would make more sense for the humans, but we'll see.

[unosarta]

In other words, SCIENCE!
Obligatory SCIENCE link is obligatory. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V83JR2IoI8k&ob=av3n)



I do that from time to time.
I'm sure you do... :smallamused:



Ah, hm. Well, that would make more sense for the humans, but we'll see.
Hm, that might be interesting. What are the angles being taken with the humans anyway?

[Maximum Zersk]

Hm, that might be interesting. What are the angles being taken with the humans anyway?

My idea was generally, a race of Kaminas, but we'll see how they actually turn out. I do remember someone saying that the second race of humans could be based off of the Vikings.

[unosarta]

My idea was generally, a race of Kaminas, but we'll see how they actually turn out. I do remember someone saying that the second race of humans could be based off of the Vikings.

O_O

As in this Kamina? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gurren_Lagann_characters#Kamina) This should prove intense. Maybe all of their language is made with the highest priority being to look bad a**? I suppose that might prove more of a cultural characteristic, than a linguistical one.

[Maximum Zersk]

O_O

As in this Kamina? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gurren_Lagann_characters#Kamina) This should prove intense. Maybe all of their language is made with the highest priority being to look bad a**? I suppose that might prove more of a cultural characteristic, than a linguistical one.

Who the hell do you think I am... talking about. :smalltongue:

Yeah, I'd guess it would be a more cutural trait, but culture and language do intersect quite often.

[unosarta]

Who the hell do you think I am... talking about. :smalltongue:
Oh my god... you just won something again.


Yeah, I'd guess it would be a more cutural trait, but culture and language do intersect quite often.
Still, that would be a very interesting cultural trait. How would they have survived for so long, being mini-Kamina's? You'd think they would have died a heroic death early on. :smalltongue:

[Maximum Zersk]

Oh my god... you just won something again.
[/QUOTE[

Toldja I did it a lot. :smallamused:

[QUOTE]
Still, that would be a very interesting cultural trait. How would they have survived for so long, being mini-Kamina's? You'd think they would have died a heroic death early on. :smalltongue:

We could justify it the way the vikings did it. Basically, only the ones looking for adventure would go out and pillage the coasts of Europe. Most Nords stayed home, with many men defending it from invaders.

Of course, any discussion that has to do with the culture should really go into the main thread. :smalltongue:

[unosarta]

Toldja I did it a lot. :smallamused:
I couldn't find a prize, so here, have a cat rolling a watermelon out of a lake. You earned it. (http://www.snapbuzz.com/images/resized/Why_thats_a_cat_in_a_lake_rolling_a_watermelon_out _of_the_water5720.jpg)



We could justify it the way the vikings did it. Basically, only the ones looking for adventure would go out and pillage the coasts of Europe. Most Nords stayed home, with many men defending it from invaders.
That would be interesting. Who would they pillage? The Sharlaq? It would be interesting to see them meet the Sea Sharlaq. :smallbiggrin:



Of course, any discussion that has to do with the culture should really go into the main thread. :smalltongue:
Oh, right, sorry.

Anyway, back to languages. Um... yeah. Now is when I would make an obligatory table, but I already made it.

Awkward.

[Maximum Zersk]

I couldn't find a prize, so here, have a cat rolling a watermelon out of a lake. You earned it. (http://www.snapbuzz.com/images/resized/Why_thats_a_cat_in_a_lake_rolling_a_watermelon_out _of_the_water5720.jpg)


Ohwhythankyou.



That would be interesting. Who would they pillage? The Sharlaq? It would be interesting to see them meet the Sea Sharlaq. :smallbiggrin:


Well, not exactly pillage, more like "adventuring", maybe. It'd be amusing to see humans deliberately play up RPG Cliches.

Or they could just go pillage "Random Human Nation A" or "Random Sharlaq Nation Jaqs". :smalltongue:



Oh, right, sorry.

Anyway, back to languages. Um... yeah. Now is when I would make an obligatory table, but I already made it.

Awkward.

:smallamused:

Well, anyway. I'll see what I can do with the Souther River-Sharlaq and the Sea Sharlaq language.

[unosarta]

Well, not exactly pillage, more like "adventuring", maybe. It'd be amusing to see humans deliberately play up RPG Cliches.
Ah, but here appears a problem. If the humans were to "adventure," in the same way that many RPGs handle it, they would be far, far more wealthy than others. Therefore, almost everyone would at least want to be an adventurer. One way to take it, would be that adventuring, as a human who would raid, would involve a lot more danger and death, and would also get hardly any pay. Those who do adventure are welcome in communities, but feared, and also tend to be a little bit crazy, more like how mercenaries are, but tied to a community.


:smallamused:

Well, anyway. I'll see what I can do with the Souther River-Sharlaq and the Sea Sharlaq language.
Yeah. I really like the idea that they are so different, while they might appear to be similar. I wonder how cultural interactions between Sea Sharlaq and River Sharlaq play out.

[Maximum Zersk]

Ah, but here appears a problem. If the humans were to "adventure," in the same way that many RPGs handle it, they would be far, far more wealthy than others. Therefore, almost everyone would at least want to be an adventurer. One way to take it, would be that adventuring, as a human who would raid, would involve a lot more danger and death, and would also get hardly any pay. Those who do adventure are welcome in communities, but feared, and also tend to be a little bit crazy, more like how mercenaries are, but tied to a community.


Hm. Well, we'll see when we get there.



Yeah. I really like the idea that they are so different, while they might appear to be similar. I wonder how cultural interactions between Sea Sharlaq and River Sharlaq play out.

Culture Shock?

[unosarta]

Hm. Well, we'll see when we get there.
OK.



Culture Shock?
Quite likely.

[Tulio d Bard]

Yeah, it is quite a lot. :smallwink:

Wow, you got it exactly! (Thoughtspeech? :smallbiggrin:)



I like the idea that the Sea Sharlaq are more aggressive than their river counterparts, the sea being a far more hostile environment in general than

That's the idea.



The thing about thoughts is, nobody knows anything about how they work. As humans, we are limited to human communications, and human interactions, and more importantly, human words. When I think of something, in a more generalized, non-specific way, I tend to associate colors. This allows me to create connections between different subjects via color, subconsciously. This is a fact that I have only recently come to realize, and it is striking. I can understand the reasoning behind disliking Thoughtspeech, and the way it is written up is probably wrong for what is attempting to be said. Thoughtspeech wouldn't be so much personalized, as varying depending on the way the person thinks. The point is, if I think in color, but another person thinks in shapes, then you have to have a different language for them. Because thought is so much less limiting and limited when compared to words, it isn't necessarily a language, in the sense that you can't learn it in a school. Only through understanding a persons mind, through intense years of study, and personal sacrifices (political sacrifices, social sacrifices, family and emotional sacrifices) would a person be able to truly communicate with a mind. Even then, almost all communication would be hazy and indistinct. If you knew someone for years, and years, you still might not understand their thoughts, even if you were to study them the entire time. The thing about thoughts is, they are most often faster than most people have the capability of perceiving. Most people use those connections mentioned earlier, via patterns, colors, shapes or a multitude of other such ways, in order to condense, and speed up thoughts. This is what has probably led humans to be such a varied and evolved species. I can understand that one would not want mind reading, but this is actually a step away from most mind reading in the classical fantasy sense; it is far, far harder to be a mind reader in this case than it is in most other fantasy settings, and one has to make many, many sacrifices just to come to the level that they can communicate with another person. This adds another level of social interaction to those few who are able to read minds at all, and then communicate with them.

TL;DR: Thoughtspeech is an attempt at a more realistic version of mind reading. Of course, those neurosciences things that I am talking about are not based on what I have researched, or what I know for fact; only what I have observed within my own mind. Interpret this as you will. :smallsmile:

So, for example: person A is thinking about time and does it in shapes; person B thinks in sounds; would person B receive the thought in shape or sound? Maybe we could say that the feeling is passed instead of exact thoughts. What do you think?


I love writing systems, and that is a very, very cool link. Thanks!

No problem. :smallsmile:


My idea was generally, a race of Kaminas, but we'll see how they actually turn out. I do remember someone saying that the second race of humans could be based off of the Vikings.

I love you! <3
Burk from Neorice's A Path to Greater Good is a good example too, speaking of awesomeness.
They would care about their people in general, being impulsive/agrssive but also lovable.
Evil humans, on the other side, would be power thirsty, measuring no efforts or consequences to reach their goals.
I think that's like maxing usual human traits.


We could justify it the way the vikings did it. Basically, only the ones looking for adventure would go out and pillage the coasts of Europe. Most Nords stayed home, with many men defending it from invaders.

Even those who stayed home would do things in an awesome way on their daily basis.
Their lives could be ruled by tropes (Narrativium (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Narrativium)?), though that could make the world a bit unreal-looking (not sure).


Of course, any discussion that has to do with the culture should really go into the main thread. :smalltongue:

Yeah, it would be great if unosarta read it all. You would be helpful there.


Well, not exactly pillage, more like "adventuring", maybe. It'd be amusing to see humans deliberately play up RPG Cliches.

Or they could just go pillage "Random Human Nation A" or "Random Sharlaq Nation Jaqs". :smalltongue:



:smallamused:

And there were some guys who said humans were boring!


Ah, but here appears a problem. If the humans were to "adventure," in the same way that many RPGs handle it, they would be far, far more wealthy than others. Therefore, almost everyone would at least want to be an adventurer. One way to take it, would be that adventuring, as a human who would raid, would involve a lot more danger and death, and would also get hardly any pay. Those who do adventure are welcome in communities, but feared, and also tend to be a little bit crazy, more like how mercenaries are, but tied to a community.



Yeah. I really like the idea that they are so different, while they might appear to be similar. I wonder how cultural interactions between Sea Sharlaq and River Sharlaq play out.

One idea was that the Seakin is much more conservative ("Those mud reptiles trading with humans, hmp! :smallmad: Good times were those when humans were a common appetizer to our people.") and Riverkin accepts changes and news much better (in fact, they did move from the seas, where their relatives had been living for who-knows-how-long time). Diplomacy would be difficult, but they wouldn't fight each other (maybe there are some wars, but not usually).

So, back on subject, how would Kaminan Humans' language look like? (Just general traits. We're still on Gnomish)

[unosarta]

Wow, you got it exactly! (Thoughtspeech? :smallbiggrin:)
Maybe...


So, for example: person A is thinking about time and does it in shapes; person B thinks in sounds; would person B receive the thought in shape or sound? Maybe we could say that the feeling is passed instead of exact thoughts. What do you think?
That is the problem. He connects and correlates thoughts with shapes, but receives a thought that is connected and correlated via sound. His mind would have no way of connecting those thoughts, which is why you would have to spend years upon years studying. Feeling would be fine, but that brings up its own can of worms. If someone associates different memories, and different ideas to different feelings, the feelings they apply will still be different based on the situation. This actually might be even more restrictive than doing associative thoughtspeech, because you would have to understand a persons feelings and emotions as perfectly as you understand your own, and if you wanted a two way conversation, they would have to understand you perfectly as well, and it would have to be done in a case by case basis; as in, I could learn to read "Charlie's" emotions and feelings, but that would take a huge amount of time, and ready access to Charlie's mind. Or I could learn to read his actual thoughts. Let's say that Charlie associates via... numbers. So when he sees a pattern, or a set of numbers within an experience or an emotion, he associates other feelings or experiences by that same number. In this version, you would have to understand how number associations would work, but after that would only require minimal contact with Charlie in order to understand his associations, since you already know how it works.



No problem. :smallsmile:
:smallbiggrin:



I love you! <3
Burk from Neorice's A Path to Greater Good is a good example too, speaking of awesomeness.
They would care about their people in general, being impulsive/agrssive but also lovable.
Evil humans, on the other side, would be power thirsty, measuring no efforts or consequences to reach their goals.
I think that's like maxing usual human traits.
That was my first reaction. And yes, having a people be "anime" in emotion, but regular people in power adds a whole different level of experience to them, and their culture. Such powerful emotions would be hard to control, and not having the ability to do anything with your life, or even react to your emotions would lead to a lot of frustrations, which could in turn lead to more violence, and more passion altogether.



Even those who stayed home would do things in an awesome way on their daily basis.
Their lives could be ruled by tropes (Narrativium?), though that could make the world a bit unreal-looking (not sure).
The trope idea could be interesting. Maybe they have a group of people (political or not) who attempt to "break" the tropes?



Yeah, it would be great if unosarta read it all. You would be helpful there.
UGH, but it is so much! :smalltongue:
I'll get on it, as soon as I am done posting this.



And there were some guys who said humans were boring!
Why would someone say that? Because they are magical, and sort of seem similar to everyday humans?



One idea was that the Seakin is much more conservative ("Those mud reptiles trading with humans, hmp! :smallmad: Good times were those when humans were a common appetizer to our people.") and Riverkin accepts changes and news much better (in fact, they did move from the seas, where their relatives had been living for who-knows-how-long time). Diplomacy would be difficult, but they wouldn't fight each other (maybe there are some wars, but not usually).
That would be interesting. Also, I love the idea of some old Sea Sharlaq waving his cane at the minnows, shouting "You kids get off of my kelp! Kids these days, back in may day, we had to swim 10 miles through the snow just to get a bite to eat!" :smallwink:



So, back on subject, how would Kaminan Humans' language look like? (Just general traits. We're still on Gnomish)
Hm... Probably some form of VOS, or something like that. It would be interesting if their syllables were (C)V(C). That would give them the ability to have have a word like: "GRAAAAAAA!!!" And still have it have meaning.

[Tulio d Bard]

That is the problem. He connects and correlates thoughts with shapes, but receives a thought that is connected and correlated via sound. His mind would have no way of connecting those thoughts, which is why you would have to spend years upon years studying. Feeling would be fine, but that brings up its own can of worms. If someone associates different memories, and different ideas to different feelings, the feelings they apply will still be different based on the situation. This actually might be even more restrictive than doing associative thoughtspeech, because you would have to understand a persons feelings and emotions as perfectly as you understand your own, and if you wanted a two way conversation, they would have to understand you perfectly as well, and it would have to be done in a case by case basis; as in, I could learn to read "Charlie's" emotions and feelings, but that would take a huge amount of time, and ready access to Charlie's mind. Or I could learn to read his actual thoughts. Let's say that Charlie associates via... numbers. So when he sees a pattern, or a set of numbers within an experience or an emotion, he associates other feelings or experiences by that same number. In this version, you would have to understand how number associations would work, but after that would only require minimal contact with Charlie in order to understand his associations, since you already know how it works.

When I suggested "feelings", I wanted it to be restrictive. But I don't think it would be very useful to usual communication, so "thoughts" might be better.


That was my first reaction. And yes, having a people be "anime" in emotion, but regular people in power adds a whole different level of experience to them, and their culture. Such powerful emotions would be hard to control, and not having the ability to do anything with your life, or even react to your emotions would lead to a lot of frustrations, which could in turn lead to more violence, and more passion altogether.

That would explain why Humans tend to adventure. They seek for adrenaline, opportunities to show their virtues and/or powers, reasons to have their names written in history, ways to change the world, chances to say badass things, etc.


The trope idea could be interesting. Maybe they have a group of people (political or not) who attempt to "break" the tropes?

Could be. But we'll discuss this in the proper thread when we get to Humans.
*adding a link (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Narrativium) to my last post in case someone doesn't know what Narrativium means*


UGH, but it is so much! :smalltongue:
I'll get on it, as soon as I am done posting this.


Do it. :smallamused:



Why would someone say that? Because they are magical, and sort of seem similar to everyday humans?

Maybe the way I said it wasn't precise (you'll see it when you read the Main Thread), but I think it was more as if they wanted something different from most conworlds (humans everywhere). IIRC, in the beginning we had Dwarves with pikes and mermen (humans were not a sure thing) instead of Sharlaq, Humans and Gnomes.


That would be interesting. Also, I love the idea of some old Sea Sharlaq waving his cane at the minnows, shouting "You kids get off of my kelp! Kids these days, back in may day, we had to swim 10 miles through the snow just to get a bite to eat!" :smallwink:

Hey, I didn't know you've met my grandpa before!
Disclaimer: No he's not too much like that. And I do like him.


Hm... Probably some form of VOS, or something like that. It would be interesting if their syllables were (C)V(C). That would give them the ability to have have a word like: "GRAAAAAAA!!!" And still have it have meaning.

LoL

And back to gnomish, we'd need to decide about Gender, Number and those things and then create some words, wouldn't we?

[unosarta]

When I suggested "feelings", I wanted it to be restrictive. But I don't think it would be very useful to usual communication, so "thoughts" might be better.
Yeah, it just seemed too restricting. And yeah, as you said, it wouldn't do very well for communication. Although, really, it doesn't do very well anyway, since you have to be a pretty powerful mage in order to accomplish that sort of feat anyway.



That would explain why Humans tend to adventure. They seek for adrenaline, opportunities to show their virtues and/or powers, reasons to have their names written in history, ways to change the world, chances to say badass things, etc.
Hm, this is good. Especially that "chances to say badass things" bit.



Could be. But we'll discuss this in the proper thread when we get to Humans.
*adding a link (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Narrativium) to my last post in case someone doesn't know what Narrativium means*
Ah, Terry Pratchett. He is an awesome author. I really need to go read Discworld.



Do it. :smallamused:
I did. :smallsigh:
And I posted in the thread. So, yeah.




Maybe the way I said it wasn't precise (you'll see it when you read the Main Thread), but I think it was more as if they wanted something different from most conworlds (humans everywhere). IIRC, in the beginning we had Dwarves with pikes and mermen (humans were not a sure thing) instead of Sharlaq, Humans and Gnomes.
What I saw was that people wanted a difference between Gnomes and Humans. And yeah, the changes that the conworld has gone through have been... interesting. But altogether too slow. :smallannoyed:



Hey, I didn't know you've met my grandpa before!
Disclaimer: No he's not too much like that. And I do like him.
That exchange of words pretty much applies to every awesome old guy. I know quite a few.



LoL

And back to gnomish, we'd need to decide about Gender, Number and those things and then create some words, wouldn't we?
Did you see my idea above? I suggested that for Gnomish we could, instead of conjugating verbs, conjugate the particles that affect them. It is just an idea.

[Urist McDwarf]

Wouldnt shalaq have many words for water similar to how eskimos have many different words for snow?

[Maximum Zersk]

Wouldnt shalaq have many words for water similar to how eskimos have many different words for snow?

That's a bit untrue.

Ya see, there's no single Inuit language. There's a whole bunch of languages that tribes all over the territories speak.

Second, the hundreds of words part is a bit misleading. See, since the Inuit languages are polysynthetic (that is, a single word is a sentence), there are basically an infinite amount of combinations, so technically there's an infinite amount of words.

Third, Sharlaqspeech is an agglutinative language, so it wouldn't have as many.

Finally, it's Sharlaq. :smalltongue:

[Urist McDwarf]

That's a bit untrue.

Ya see, there's no single Inuit language. There's a whole bunch of languages that tribes all over the territories speak.

Second, the hundreds of words part is a bit misleading. See, since the Inuit languages are polysynthetic (that is, a single word is a sentence), there are basically an infinite amount of combinations, so technically there's an infinite amount of words.

Third, Sharlaqspeech is an agglutinative language, so it wouldn't have as many.

Finally, it's Sharlaq. :smalltongue:

Oh, o0kay. I just thought that they would have many words for water of varying depth, temperature, ect.

[Maximum Zersk]

Oh, sorta. Like I said, North Riversharlaq is an Agglutinative language, so, for example, tilljiqq, 'big water' could be considered a word all it's own.

[ref]

Whoa... This has moved so fast. I'm off to bed now, but tomorrow I'll try to post something more.

[Urist McDwarf]

Oh, sorta. Like I said, North Riversharlaq is an Agglutinative language, so, for example, tilljiqq, 'big water' could be considered a word all it's own.

Oh okay that makes sense.

[Maximum Zersk]

Whoa... This has moved so fast. I'm off to bed now, but tomorrow I'll try to post something more.

We'll be waiting!


Oh okay that makes sense.

That's good, because that means I'm getting better at explaining things. :smallbiggrin:

[unosarta]

We 'll be are waiting!

Fix'ed for you. :smallbiggrin:

[Maximum Zersk]

Meh, it's basically a grammar construction now. If you feel the need to fix that, do so with a lot of other idiosyncratic speech contructs.

[unosarta]

Meh, it's basically a grammar construction now. If you feel the need to fix that, do so with a lot of other idiosyncratic speech contructs.

I only know so much about linguistics, and Wikipedia isn't helping me at all.

Explain? :smallconfused:

Wikipedia?! Why have you failed me in such a manner?!

[Maximum Zersk]

I only know so much about linguistics, and Wikipedia isn't helping me at all.

Explain? :smallconfused:

Wikipedia?! Why have you failed me in such a manner?!

As time goes on, people will make little phrases and such that are probably not gramatically correct, but they have their own meaning.

[unosarta]

As time goes on, people will make little phrases and such that are probably not gramatically correct, but they have their own meaning.

Ah, OK. You are the new wikipedia god!

Worship the Wikipedia god! Information for his information throne!

[Maximum Zersk]

So I'm Tzeentch now, eh? Fun. :smalltongue:

But anyway, I think I'll do some quick work on the Wiki page for the Sharlaq language after I'm done the write-up in the other thread.

[unosarta]

So I'm Tzeentch now, eh? Fun. :smalltongue:
It is a very disturbing that one of the gods of chaos is also the god of Wikipedia. :smalltongue:


But anyway, I think I'll do some quick work on the Wiki page for the Sharlaq language after I'm done the write-up in the other thread.
OK.

[ref]

Basic Grammar

Well, this is the point where you start needing words in the language you're making, but I suck at doing that, so I'm gonna leave that to people with more inventive. Particles are to be one syllable, while other words are at least two. (Mood and certainty indicators can be one, too).

The way to go is to make a list of the different particles and indicators that there will be. This is supposed to be a long list.

Now about the noun construction, there is a particle meaning "quality", this will go immediately after the noun (though, as usual, it can be moved to before the noun if you want to concentrate on that). This is usually how you use adjectives: bird (quality) big, but it is used too to make some nouns that are closely related to each other. water (quality) falling means "rain", water (quality) flowing is a river, so on. Water (quality) hard would be "ice", and although it's not totally true, water (quality) hard (quality) falling would be "snow".

Some of the nouns have evolved into "noun classes". For instance, it was said that the gnomes have lots of metals, and a use / meaning for every one (at least it was suggested). Language reflects that by including a "metal" particle. (Not really a particle, but working much as one).

Verbs can take the quality particle to form adverbs, and in fact, a few new verbs are also formed like this, vg walk (quality) fast, or run. However, the quality particle is not to be abused. The general guideline is to speak the necessary info to get understood and no more, really. If the other speaker feels he needs more data, he will repeat our sentence with the added data and the mood indicator of question.

This will likely raise some questions among you guys, so feel free to shoot away. Next time I check this thread, we might likely be on page 10. :-P

[Maximum Zersk]

Ooh, neat. So if I wanted to say, "I quickly ate a red apple", it'd be like this.

Eat(quality)quickly (sub)I (direct)Apple(quality)red (time)before (certain).

[ref]

That's correct grammar. Nice!

[unosarta]

Ooh, neat. So if I wanted to say, "I quickly ate a red apple", it'd be like this.

Eat(quality)quickly (sub)I (direct)Apple(quality)red (time)before (certain).

Interesting. That is a lot of particles. Maybe we should make a list of particles for Gnomish? I have no idea what particles they might use, so I am going to let Ref do that before I make a table. :smallamused:

[Tulio d Bard]

Am I getting it wrong, or are we gonna have much less words than languages as English? From the "water" example, we'll have one noun in place of four others (and ref only cited few). The particles don't really add to the word count since they're used to build lots of words. So we'd have a word that is used in many others derivative from it, and a quality particle that is used in many words with the same characteristic.

One thing I thought we could do to create the words is to use "particles" for that. But not the same way we did with sharlaq. We could give each letter phoneme a meaning. So the word itself shows its own meaning/essence, making it possible to figure that without knowing it previously. That would be very general like "a" means "material", "r" means "spiritual", "l" means "tool". We'd have to be very careful if we did this, because a bad choice of meanings would make some words impossible to make or not matching with the meaning of the letters phoneme. And probably not all letters have a meaning, so that we can make different words for similar things.

[Maximum Zersk]

So, basically, sound symbolism?

[Tulio d Bard]

I didn't know it existed.... ._.
But yeah, sound symbolism.

[unosarta]

I didn't know it existed.... ._.
But yeah, sound symbolism.

This sounds like an interesting thought.

[Maximum Zersk]

Okay, I think I got an idea for one of the Human's Protolanguage to work on after the Gnoman language.

How about a Polysynthetic Tonal language that is Tripartite? The Sentence order would be SVO.

What do you think?

[unosarta]

Okay, I think I got an idea for one of the Human's Protolanguage to work on after the Gnoman language.

How about a Polysynthetic Tonal language that is Tripartite? The Sentence order would be SVO.

What do you think?

Sounds interesting. I actually have pretty much written up the instectoid language, and I have given them a class/caste system. They are a hivemind, so they rarely if ever use it, but when they come into contact with other races they would use it. It sounds very... distinct would probably be the best word.

I suppose I had better start typing it up.

Also; Tripartite? Wikipedia here I come!

[Edit]: Even after reading the Wiki, I don't really understand. So, there is a different suffix to the object and subject? Huh.

...And, here is the language.


Xsoaetsziq (The Blind Ones)

Known as the Blind Ones to those who are unable, or who do not know, the Xsoaetsziq language, the Xsoaetsziq are strange, insect like beings that live almost entirely underground. They dig their hives around their Queen, and are located deep, deep underground. They go above ground for food, and are notorious scavengers, eating anything at all, as long as it is edible.

The hive is a giant mass of underground tunnels and twisting passages. They loop and turn, causing all but the most experienced to become infinitely lost. The hive has very few entrances to it that are on the surface, but usually has one, which appears as a giant dome, which several smallish holes all over it, roughly 20 feet wide.

The Sighted go out of the hive, and lead the Fanged to food, with powerful pheromones. The Fanged take the food back to the Hive, and present it to their Queen. At the end of the day, all of the Xsoaetsziq gather in the Queen’s birthing chamber, where she sits with her Water-Bearers, and gorges on the food. At this point, the hive is in the most danger that it could be in, and the Clawed usually take shifts between gorging and guarding.

The Gorge lasts about 2 hours. Afterwards, the Xsoaetsziq either sleep, or continue working. Usually the Sighted and Fanged sleep, and the Workers take shifts of working and sleeping. The Queen usually sleeps at this point, but even from her unconscious, she guides the Hive.

If the Hive becomes too big for the surrounding area to support it, the Queen will have the water-bearers hatch the Queen Egg, which holds a new Queen, and then the Queen teaches the new Queen all she knows, before the new Queen leaves with about half of the population.

If a Queen dies, then the Queen Egg is also hatched, but contains all of the old Queen’s memories. If the Queen Egg is hatched, and the Queen is still alive, she must immediately set out to make another, which is a process that takes several days. The Queen Egg is incredibly hard, and is actually stronger than many types of stone. Only the Water-Bearers have the right pheromones to be able to hatch the Queen Egg without hurting the Queen.

The Queen is able to change the type of Xsoaetsziq that any of her subjects are, by spending several hours in their presence, and concentrating on them. She usually likes to keep them around the same percentages. A normal hive’s makeup is usually as so:

{table=head]Position|Percent
Queen|Only 1

Worker|15%

Fanged|20%

Clawed|30%

Water-Bearers|5%

Sighted|30%[/table]

Workers maintain and construct the hive. They are low and menial, barely having any status at all within the hive.

Queens, obviously, bear children, and usually assign workers to take care of them. Queens also have a connection to the mind of every single bug in the hive.

Sighted are able to see above ground, and lay scent trails for the Fanged to follow. They are physically the weakest of the bunch, but are very quick, and agile.

Clawed stay in the hive and protect their Queen. They fight off predators, and anyone trying to hurt her. A full 25% of the hive might be Clawed at a time. If they need more, any non-Queen can be converted into another species, if the Queen wills it.

Fanged retrieve food for the hive. They are the most physically powerful, but also not very well equipped in a fight. They are slow and lumbering, but able to fend off usually anything that might attack them. They usually deposit food that the Sighted have found, for their Queen's inspection.

Water-Bearers are the mates of the Queen. Because she is almost constantly giving birth, they also function as the raisers of children, if there are enough, and as midwives to the Queen, as well has fertilizing her eggs. Water-Bearers have even less personality as the other jobs in the hive, their entire will and focus going to the Queen and her children. At least one is almost constantly in the process of fertilizing her eggs.

Their language is very, very simple. It’s basic syllable structure is (C)V(V)(C), and the sentence structure at its most basic is OVS. Full sentence structure is as follows:


(Time) Object (Smell) Subject + Verb (Question)

Time is when the sentence happened. Object is pretty much self explanatory. Smell is locational and adverbs, and also slightly adjective-like. Subject and Verb are pretty much self explanatory. Question is where one would add a question word (such as who, what, where, when, why, how, etc).

Phonemes:

Consonants

{table=head]Consonants|Pronunciation

Xs| [Ks]

S| [S]

Sz| [Ts]

Kz| [Kz]

K| [K]

Q| [tʃ]

T| [t]

-X| [Ks] (Only appears at the end of a syllable)[/table]


Vowels

{table=head]Vowels|Pronunciation

A|/æ/

O|/ʌ/

E|/ɛ/

I|/iː/

Oo|/uː/[/table]


Lexicon
{table=head]English|Xsoaetsziq

Queen|Kzaat

Hive|Soqkzaat

Darkness|Xsook

Abdomen|Szoxsat

Worker|Kzasoq

Sighted|Katszao

Sight|Szao

No|Siq

Yes|Kat

Sand|Soq

Earth|Szosoq

Cold|Xsat

Person|Kzakaet

Mind|Kaetsoq

Eye/s|Xsik

Smell|Xsaek

Nose/Scent Receptacle|Xsaet

Mother|Xsoaet

Children|Sziq

Eat|Qit

Food|Kexsa

For|Xsot

Hate|Qaq

Go|Kak

Come|Taq

Find (Food)|Qet

Retrieve|Szi

Water|Kzoak

Fanged|Katqoei

Clawed|Qokta

Water-Bearer|Kzoaxse

End|Sax

Beginning|Szoq

Kill|Xsix

Die|Kzao

Shell|Xsisk

Protect|Xsiskax

Think/Know|Xsooq

Remember|Xsaiq

Create|Saxso

Nurture|Sek

We|Qek

I (Hive)|Kaq

You (Hive)|Kot

(Commanding)|Sexsek

Him (Neuter)|Sesok

[/table]


Smells

{table=head]English|Xsoaetsziq

Strong|Qit

Weak|Kzoa

In the hive|Saq

Danger|Kzaeq

Bad|Kzoat

Good|Xsaa

Friendly|Saex

Loved|Siex

Female|Kit

Male|Kax

Neuter|Sot

Urgent|Kzox

Many|Szo
[/table]


Time
{table=head]English|Xsoaetsziq

Always|Kixso

Later|Six

Now|Szeq

Earlier|Szaq
[/table]


Question
{table=head]English|Xsoaetsziq

What|Kexsit

Who|Kexsat

Where|Kzoxsoet

When|Kooxsaq

How|Kixsoat[/table]



The Xsoaetsziq have no concept of why, or of exact time. Their number system is power of 5.


They have actually been statted out for D&D, and submitted to the GITP Monster Competition (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9278534&postcount=3), for 3.5.

[Maximum Zersk]

Basically, in Tripartite, there are three different cases: Subject of Intransitive Verb, Subject of Transitive Verb, and Object of Intransitive Verb.

Also, looks great! Might wanna post the info about the Xsoaetsziq in the main thread. :smalltongue:

[unosarta]

Basically, in Tripartite, there are three different cases: Subject of Intransitive Verb, Subject of Transitive Verb, and Object of Intransitive Verb.

Interesting.


Also, looks great! Might wanna post the info about the Xsoaetsziq in the main thread. :smalltongue:


OK!

[Maximum Zersk]

Agh, I should be working on this... but I'm not... >.>

[unosarta]

Agh, I should be working on this... but I'm not... >.>

I know! >_<
All of my creative juices are being sapped by D&D.

[Tulio d Bard]

I know! >_<
All of my creative juices are being sapped by D&D.

You are the lucky one then... :smallfrown:

[ref]

Hmm... I'm sorry I disappeared. September is always mad crazy.

[unosarta]

You are the lucky one then... :smallfrown:
Yeah, at least I have the chance to do a little bit of that. :smallsigh:

[Tulio d Bard]

Well, does anyone here know anything about sound symbolism that isn't from Wikipedia? It says there that the meaning each phoneme has is similar in different cultures, and they usually carry a general meaning (sharp, big, strong, protecting, etc). Gnomes, I believe, would have this in a slightly different way. Keeping in mind that their language is mostly planned, they'd put sound symbolism artificially, having phonemes attributed to the things that are more present in their lives: metal, tool, being, flying are some examples. We should remember that working this way, we must be really careful when we choose the meanings. If too many phonemes have a meaning and we eventually have no options to write a word with none of those, that word might be misinterpreted.

[Maximum Zersk]

Well, does anyone here know anything about sound symbolism that isn't from Wikipedia? It says there that the meaning each phoneme has is similar in different cultures, and they usually carry a general meaning (sharp, big, strong, protecting, etc). Gnomes, I believe, would have this in a slightly different way. Keeping in mind that their language is mostly planned, they'd put sound symbolism artificially, having phonemes attributed to the things that are more present in their lives: metal, tool, being, flying are some examples. We should remember that working this way, we must be really careful when we choose the meanings. If too many phonemes have a meaning and we eventually have no options to write a word with none of those, that word might be misinterpreted.

No, not much beyond Wikipedia. Though you do have a good point. From what I've seen of English sound symbolism, it's been restricted to only the vowels, "ah", "o", and "i".

[Tulio d Bard]

No, not much beyond Wikipedia. Though you do have a good point. From what I've seen of English sound symbolism, it's been restricted to only the vowels, "ah", "o", and "i".

It seems that there are some other ones. Note that they're kinda present in many languages. b-, for example, is more present in, say, "barriers", "bulges" and "bursting" words than other sounds. There are some cases in which a combination of phonemes carry a meaning, rather than a single one (mp for example would make the action more forceful, like in 'step' X 'stamp'). But it would be much more complicated if we think of these double ones. Gnomish would probably use a combination of artificial Clustering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_symbolism#Clustering)
and natural Iconism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_symbolism#Iconism).

"Clustering is language dependent, although closely related languages will have similar clustering relationships."
"It is suggested by Magnus that this kind of iconism is universal across languages."

[Ranger Mattos]

I find this GitP conworlding project interesting. However, I won't be saying much since I'm trying to build my own world right now.

Anyways, anyone looked at this (http://www.zompist.com/kit.html)?

[Maximum Zersk]

It seems that there are some other ones. Note that they're kinda present in many languages. b-, for example, is more present in, say, "barriers", "bulges" and "bursting" words than other sounds. There are some cases in which a combination of phonemes carry a meaning, rather than a single one (mp for example would make the action more forceful, like in 'step' X 'stamp'). But it would be much more complicated if we think of these double ones. Gnomish would probably use a combination of artificial Clustering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_symbolism#Clustering)
and natural Iconism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_symbolism#Iconism).

"Clustering is language dependent, although closely related languages will have similar clustering relationships."
"It is suggested by Magnus that this kind of iconism is universal across languages."

Hm, interesting. We'll keep that in mind then!


I find this GitP conworlding project interesting. However, I won't be saying much since I'm trying to build my own world right now.

Anyways, anyone looked at this (http://www.zompist.com/kit.html)?

I have, actually. It's pretty good for people who don't really know how to conlang.