Let's create a language!

[BokaBB]

SVO is the best,don't change that.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I'm okay with SVO as long as we don't have other Englishy/Indo-European stuff. You still want base-10, right? Also, could you look at your fancy CA threads?

We can change the base. I look sometimes at fancy CA. Please try to play Hunting (Game).
Here is a proposal for the base 12 number system:
Ek - 1
Ouk - 2
Mi - 3
La - 4
Fen - 5
Gu - 6
Nep - 7
Lo - 8
Bir - 9
Es - 10
Erg - 11
Meng - 12
Also,
Ngep - number
Mengek - 13
Menges - 22
Oukmeng - 24
Lomeng - 96
Mengmeng - 144
Mengmengmeng - 1728
Etu - 20736,also means many
Mietu - 62208
Etuetu - 429981696
Sel - plus,positive
Mi- - negative,negative number,minus
Dok - multiply
Bif - divide
What do you think?
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[Schiaparelliorbust]

SVO is the best,don't change that.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I'm okay with SVO as long as we don't have other Englishy/Indo-European stuff. You still want base-10, right? Also, could you look at your fancy CA threads?

We can change the base. I look sometimes at fancy CA. Please try to play Hunting (Game).
Here is a proposal for the base 12 number system:
Ek - 1
Ouk - 2
Mi - 3
La - 4
Fen - 5
Gu - 6
Nep - 7
Lo - 8
Bir - 9
Es - 10
Erg - 11
Meng - 12
Also,
Ngep - number
Mengek - 13
Menges - 22
Oukmeng - 24
Lomeng - 96
Mengmeng - 144
Mengmengmeng - 1728
Etu - 20736,also means many
Mietu - 62208
Etuetu - 429981696
Sel - plus,positive
Mi- - negative,negative number,minus
Dok - multiply
Bif - divide
What do you think?
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I'm okay with your numbers up to 12, but I think that big numbers shouldn't simply be repetitions of some unit word. I think words for operations should be repurposed words that normally mean something else. Add in English can simply mean to put more of something to said something. Multiply can mean reproduce or get much larger. In Turkish, multiplying comes from the word for cross. The same thing should be true for this language.

[BokaBB]

I'm okay with SVO as long as we don't have other Englishy/Indo-European stuff. You still want base-10, right? Also, could you look at your fancy CA threads?

We can change the base. I look sometimes at fancy CA. Please try to play Hunting (Game).
Here is a proposal for the base 12 number system:
Ek - 1
Ouk - 2
Mi - 3
La - 4
Fen - 5
Gu - 6
Nep - 7
Lo - 8
Bir - 9
Es - 10
Erg - 11
Meng - 12
Also,
Ngep - number
Mengek - 13
Menges - 22
Oukmeng - 24
Lomeng - 96
Mengmeng - 144
Mengmengmeng - 1728
Etu - 20736,also means many
Mietu - 62208
Etuetu - 429981696
Sel - plus,positive
Mi- - negative,negative number,minus
Dok - multiply
Bif - divide
What do you think?
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I'm okay with your numbers up to 12, but I think that big numbers shouldn't simply be repetitions of some unit word. I think words for operations should be repurposed words that normally mean something else. Add in English can simply mean to put more of something to said something. Multiply can mean reproduce or get much larger. In Turkish, multiplying comes from the word for cross. The same thing should be true for this language.

Hmmmmm,let's see your proposals.
I make minor changes:
Nge - number
Ngep - decimal number
Ngepe - , (if it wasn't already made)
Ou - question, also a suffix that means questionable or unknown
Malunou - alien
Oune - question mark
Liz - danger (can you find the word for angry,please?)
Lizeo - be in danger
Lize - exclamation mark
Please check Hunting (Game).
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[Schiaparelliorbust]

Hmmmmm,let's see your proposals.
I make minor changes:
Nge - number
Ngep - decimal number
Ngepe - , (if it wasn't already made)
Ou - question, also a suffix that means questionable or unknown
Malunou - alien
Oune - question mark
Liz - danger (can you find the word for angry,please?)
Lizeo - be in danger
Lize - exclamation mark
Please check Hunting (Game).
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I think you make some concepts that should be longer words or phrases shorter. I don't think any language has a single word for decimal numbers, but you just added a p to the end. I don't think this is how we should make words.

[Moosey]

SVO is the best,don't change that.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

SVO is t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶m̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶v̶e̶b̶l̶e̶n̶ ̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶a̶l̶ inferior to VSO. It's a fact. VSO makes the most sense imo since it's structured like a mathematical function:: eat(I,apple); therefore VSO is the best.

[Schiaparelliorbust]

SVO is t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶m̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶v̶e̶b̶l̶e̶n̶ ̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶a̶l̶ inferior to VSO. It's a fact. VSO makes the most sense imo since it's structured like a mathematical function:: eat(I,apple); therefore VSO is the best.

So do you want VSO? You could just as well say VOS because you can reorder the function: eat(apple,I)
Edit: I think your tiny text is smaller than my tiny text. I couldn't find any super tiny text converters on the internet. How do you do it?

[Moosey]

use size=25 instead of size=50; it was literally in the post you quoted

[fluffykitty]

Added rows for word order and number base to the sheet. Also, words and stuff should probably be added to the sheet.

[BokaBB]

Added rows for word order and number base to the sheet. Also, words and stuff should probably be added to the sheet.

You definitely should add words,we need to know what we have done and what not.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[fluffykitty]

Added words from this page of the thread. I think we should start working on the grammar more.

[BokaBB]

Added words from this page of the thread. I think we should start working on the grammar more.

Yes.
You seem as an useful member of the project. I have made tons of grammar,but it is stagnating now.
Please make a few words just to integrate and to allow me to see your language style.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[fluffykitty]

If you have made grammar, please add it to the sheet. I think we should copy all existing roots/etc to the sheet before creating more, to make it easier to avoid unintentional synonyms or homophones.

[fluffykitty]

All roots and affixes in this thread have been added to the sheet, except those that were replaced later. There may be errors, so please double-check the lists. Some more improvements I thought of are replacing the "X version of Y" affixes (like -rat and -beo) with adjectives, and additional plural suffixes for more refined meanings (eg -ral for "some/the people are knocking on my door", with no particular relationship between the people, -ran for "a/the group of people is knocking on my door", implying that the people are associated with each other, and -rat for "people knock on my door", considered as a general truth that does not refer to anyone in particular). I also propose -er- and -est- for "to begin to" and "to stop -ing" (inserted before the -eo suffix, so elkereo=to start having and elkesteo=to stop having). Finally, ngong (I/me) is the only word with a syllable-initial /ng/, which I think shouldn't be allowed.

[Moosey]

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

[LuxiusGOL]

This is going to be a group building site of a new language. We will together create an absolutely new language here by the following principles:
- Everyone will add small bits of vocabulary,grammar and similar.
- Everyone interested can contribute.
- Once added,the grammar or vocabulary cannot be changed unless I allow so.
- It will have no official name unless I say so.
- It will be written using Latin alphabet (with the possibility of removing or adding new letters) phonetically if possible.
- After it has got a large enough amount of grammar and vocabulary some volunteer (I have to much things to do now) will write a big dictionary and grammar of it here. I will only do that if I have time,which I often don't have.
Let's begin contributing.
At the beginning I will only contribute that there will be no articles (like the or a) since I find them unnecessary.
Have a good day!

BokaBB

Let's start with numbers and pronouns.

1: dup (the sound of a single piece of stone dropping to the ground)
2: klap (the sound of two pieces of stone hitting each other)
3: krush (the sound of holding three pieces of stone in the hand and rubbing them with each other)
4: o'dugwit (o' = the sound one produces when not finding something. dugwit = dup+gwit; when two of {p,t,k,b,d,g} are consecutive, the first one is dropped because otherwise its sound can hardly be heard. So o'dugwit = 5-1 = 4)
5: gwit (the sound of a foot stepping on mud. A foot symbols five; a hand can do the same job but there isn't a sound that is very characteristic of a single hand)
6: gwidup
7: gwiklap
8: gwikrush
9: o'dupwop
10: pwop (the sound of clapping hands)
11: pwop dup
13: pwop krush
20: klap pwop
25: klap pwop gwit
100: hwa (the sound standing for surprise, when one sees a large number of the same thing)
101: hwa dup
168: hwa gwidup pwop gwikrush
949: o'dupwop hwa o'dugwit pwop o'dupwop
1000: woa (the sound of an even bigger surprise)
2020: klap woa klap pwop
5000: gwit woa
10000: pwop woa
1000000: woa woa

I/me: ngong (since the sound is produced from the "back", deep in the throat, which is ideal for self-reference)
You (single): shyu (since this sound produces a stream of air towards the front, which is ideal for referring to someone in front of you)
He/him/she/her: pwia (which is one of the sounds easily pronounced when you drag your lower lip sideways, ideal for referring to someone beside you. And I want the language to be absolutely gender-neutral, which avoids a number of problems)
We/us: ngong klap
You (plural): shyu klap
They/them: pwia klap

gwidup pwop o'dupwop woa o'dugwit hwa klap pwop = nice

[fluffykitty]

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

I added the Swadesh list to the sheet and filled in some of the words. If we're overhauling the tense system, then maybe we should try to have a cleaner separation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tense%E2% ... %80%93mood.

Edit (8:35): I analyzed the syllable structure of the roots currently in the language and made a proposal for a phonology and phonotactics in the "mess around here" subsheet. It requires modification of some words, but most of the existing roots and all existing affixes are unaffected. Please post thoughts below.

[BokaBB]

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

I added the Swadesh list to the sheet and filled in some of the words. If we're overhauling the tense system, then maybe we should try to have a cleaner separation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tense%E2% ... %80%93mood.

Edit (8:35): I analyzed the syllable structure of the roots currently in the language and made a proposal for a phonology and phonotactics in the "mess around here" subsheet. It requires modification of some words, but most of the existing roots and all existing affixes are unaffected. Please post thoughts below.

Thanks a lot for your work, fluffykitty!Can you post your work here, please?Ask if you don't know.
Please be careful with -ut (intensifies things),-e (a thing used to do a certain thing) and p or -ep (marks that something is similar to some thing).
Number (nge) and decimal number (ngep) also have a ng at the beginning.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[Schiaparelliorbust]

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

I added the Swadesh list to the sheet and filled in some of the words. If we're overhauling the tense system, then maybe we should try to have a cleaner separation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tense%E2% ... %80%93mood.

Edit (8:35): I analyzed the syllable structure of the roots currently in the language and made a proposal for a phonology and phonotactics in the "mess around here" subsheet. It requires modification of some words, but most of the existing roots and all existing affixes are unaffected. Please post thoughts below.

I totally agree with your phonology. I don't think we should add every single word to the spreadsheet yet because some are too simple like, as I said before, nge = number and ngep= decimal. If the concept is complex/composite and uncommon then we should have two words for it. By uncommon I mean it isn't something we always think about.
Edit: I didn't know that -p meant something similar but still calling a decimal "number-like" sounds weird.

[BokaBB]

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

Just infinitive,present, perfect, future and potential, please.
I want for the language to be relatively easy to learn.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

[Schiaparelliorbust]

Just present, perfect, future and potential, please.
I want for the language to be relatively easy to learn.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

Maybe for some tenses we can have separate words analogous to "will" in English? Tell me if that's a good idea. Also, in Turkish we have a suffix -imsi meaning "similar to" but we don't really use it for concepts that deserve their own word/word group.

[fluffykitty]

Thanks a lot for your work, fluffykitty!Can you post your work here, please?Ask if you don't know.

Syllables are CVC, except possibly for semivowels. Onset consonants are one of /mnptkbdgfsʃvzlr/ or the sound that <c> represents and coda consonants are one of /mnptkfsʃlr/. Coda /ptkfsʃ/ become /bdgvzʒ/ if followed by a syllable with a voiced onset (one of /mnbdgvzlr/). Coda /mn/ followed by one of /pbtdkg/ assimilates (before /pb/->/m/, before /td/->/n/, before /kg/->/ŋ/). These modifications are reflected in spelling (except coda devoicing at the end of words, if it can be undone by a suffix, eg <nag> /nak/-><nageo> /nag(j)o/, and /ŋ/ is written as /n/). Vowels are /aɛeɪiou/ (or whatever those end up as), and /jw/ may be allowed before or after vowels depending on how we choose to simplify diphthongs (/eo/->/jo/ or /o/).
For adapting existing words to this system, onset /ŋg/ reduces to /g/, other onset clusters reduce to their first consonant, /h/ becomes /f/, coda /ŋg/ reduces to /n/, and other coda clusters reduce to their second consonant (and may be devoiced, but /bdg/ are still written with <bdg> since they may regain voicing if followed by a suffix starting with a vowel). In the event of conflicts (eg <erg> and <ek> or <olt> and <ot>), I suggest keeping the other letter of the cluster, producing <er> and <ol>.

Number (nge) and decimal number (ngep) also have a ng at the beginning.

Yes, I had forgotten about those at the time.

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

Just infinitive,present, perfect, future and potential, please.
I want for the language to be relatively easy to learn.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I think potentiality should be expressed with an adverb. It seems strange to include a potential mood but not other moods, like the subjunctive, jussive, or conditional. The inflection system could be structured to inflect verbs for aspect and mood by default, and include optional tense infixes (so <elken> could be past, present, or future, and a specifically present version would be <elkaden>). This would allow more possibilities like <elkadeo> for "to have right now" or "to be having" without having to learn excessive amounts of inflection.
If we do this, I propose <-ad-> for present, <-in-> for future, and <-ut-> for past. For aspect and mood, <-eo> will still be an infinitive (although after the sound changes it will be <-yo> or <-o>), <-en> will be imperfective (focusing on continuity of an action, eg <ngong/gon nagaden>->I'm eating), <-at> will be perfective (focusing on the totality of an action, eg <sala nagutat>->we ate), and <-is> will be subjunctive (covering hypothetical situations, like in "I demand that he eat"). The subjunctive will also be used for a conditional (English "would") and jussive (some uses of English "should", like in the first sentence of the previous paragraph) for simplicity. <-as> will be an imperative (with the option to include the subject explicitly, eg for number distinction) and a hortative (English let's, but not restricted to first person plural). In total, there are eight affixes, which shouldn't be hard to learn (English "be" has eight inflected forms as well: be, being, been, am, is, are, was, were; and copulas in other Indo-European languages often have many more forms).

Maybe for some tenses we can have separate words analogous to "will" in English? tell me if that's a good idea. Also, in Turkish we have a suffix -imsi meaning "similar to" but we don't really use it for concepts that deserve their own word/word group.

The current tense system uses rigeo+infinitive to indicate futurity. Multi-word tenses are a good idea, but the basic tenses of my proposed revised system don't use them. However, they may still be used for finer detail (eg French "Je vais manger" (I'm going to eat), even though they have a primitive future "Je mangerai" (I will eat)).

Edit (1:06 AM): Actually, the current system uses the -ao suffix for the future. I'm not entirely sure how I thought "to shine" was a future auxiliary verb.

Finally, I've noticed that we have a subject/object distinction, but only for you (plural) and they/them. We should either add cases to, at minimum, the other pronouns, or remove the cases from those pronouns.

[Schiaparelliorbust]

Thanks a lot for your work, fluffykitty!Can you post your work here, please?Ask if you don't know.

Syllables are CVC, except possibly for semivowels. Onset consonants are one of /mnptkbdgfsʃvzlr/ or the sound that <c> represents and coda consonants are one of /mnptkfsʃlr/. Coda /ptkfsʃ/ become /bdgvzʒ/ if followed by a syllable with a voiced onset (one of /mnbdgvzlr/). Coda /mn/ followed by one of /pbtdkg/ assimilates (before /pb/->/m/, before /td/->/n/, before /kg/->/ŋ/). These modifications are reflected in spelling (except coda devoicing at the end of words, if it can be undone by a suffix, eg <nag> /nak/-><nageo> /nag(j)o/, and /ŋ/ is written as /n/). Vowels are /aɛeɪiou/ (or whatever those end up as), and /jw/ may be allowed before or after vowels depending on how we choose to simplify diphthongs (/eo/->/jo/ or /o/).
For adapting existing words to this system, onset /ŋg/ reduces to /g/, other onset clusters reduce to their first consonant, /h/ becomes /f/, coda /ŋg/ reduces to /n/, and other coda clusters reduce to their second consonant (and may be devoiced, but /bdg/ are still written with <bdg> since they may regain voicing if followed by a suffix starting with a vowel). In the event of conflicts (eg <erg> and <ek> or <olt> and <ot>), I suggest keeping the other letter of the cluster, producing <er> and <ol>.

Number (nge) and decimal number (ngep) also have a ng at the beginning.

Yes, I had forgotten about those at the time.

We should prolly add all the words from the swadesh 207 list. Also overhaul verb conjugation: I've added several tenses; should we have subjunctive?

Just infinitive,present, perfect, future and potential, please.
I want for the language to be relatively easy to learn.
Elkeo beo rigeu!

BokaBB

I think potentiality should be expressed with an adverb. It seems strange to include a potential mood but not other moods, like the subjunctive, jussive, or conditional. The inflection system could be structured to inflect verbs for aspect and mood by default, and include optional tense infixes (so <elken> could be past, present, or future, and a specifically present version would be <elkaden>). This would allow more possibilities like <elkadeo> for "to have right now" or "to be having" without having to learn excessive amounts of inflection.
If we do this, I propose <-ad-> for present, <-in-> for future, and <-ut-> for past. For aspect and mood, <-eo> will still be an infinitive, <-en> will be imperfective (focusing on continuity of an action, eg <ngong/gon nagaden>->I'm eating), <-at> will be perfective (focusing on the totality of an action, eg <sala nagutat>->we ate), and <-is> will be subjunctive (covering hypothetical situations, like in "I demand that he eat"). The subjunctive will also be used for a conditional (English "would") and jussive (some uses of English "should", like in the first sentence of the previous paragraph) for simplicity. <-as> will be an imperative (with the option to include the subject explicitly, eg for number distinction) and a hortative (English let's, but not restricted to first person plural). In total, there are eight affixes, which shouldn't be hard to learn (English "be" has eight inflected forms as well: be, being, been, am, is, are, was, were; and copulas in other Indo-European languages often have many more forms).

Maybe for some tenses we can have separate words analogous to "will" in English? tell me if that's a good idea. Also, in Turkish we have a suffix -imsi meaning "similar to" but we don't really use it for concepts that deserve their own word/word group.

The current tense system uses rigeo+infinitive to indicate futurity. Multi-word tenses are a good idea, but the basic tenses of my proposed revised system don't use them. However, they may still be used for finer detail (eg French "Je vais manger" (I'm going to eat), even though they have a primitive future "Je mangerai" (I will eat)).

Finally, I've noticed that we have a subject/object distinction, but only for you (plural) and they/them. We should either add cases to, at minimum, the other pronouns, or remove the cases from those pronouns.

So in the first part are you saying that sounds or letters should change depending on earlier sounds/letters? That concept is not unfamiliar o me, it is ubiquitous in Turkish. I like that idea. Isn't subjunctive like "I know that you <lied> to me." At least that's how it is in French. I think it should be in the language. In the spreadsheet I see that we have a lot of affixes like "a scary version", "an artificial version". We even have "version made of wheat"! This all feels waaaaaay too specific and weird. What use will adjectives have? We could append adjectives to the starts or ends of words maybe but this is too much in its current state.

[fluffykitty]

So in the first part are you saying that sounds or letters should change depending on earlier sounds/letters?

The effects I listed are all of later sounds on earlier sounds, but your way could be interesting as well.

Isn't subjunctive like "I know that you <lied> to me." At least that's how it is in French. I think it should be in the language.

Translate says French uses the indicative there, and I would agree. The subjunctive is more for situations that are not implied to be real, for example "I doubt that *you ate nothing today*". My verb proposal uses <-is> for this meaning, along with a few others.

In the spreadsheet I see that we have a lot of affixes like "a scary version", "an artificial version". We even have "version made of wheat"! This all feels waaaaaay too specific and weird. What use will adjectives have? We could append adjectives to the starts or ends of words maybe but this is too much in its current state.

I agree that many of these affixes are redundant. One possible effect of appending adjectives to nouns is affixes like -(o)m attaching to the adjective instead of the noun (cf. the queen of England's crown=the queen's crown). This might be an interesting feature to have, even without compounding with adjectives. Speaking of adjectives, it might be helpful to have a suffix for converting a verb to an adjective or noun, eg <cakun> or <cakadun>->"dying", <cakutun>->"dead".

[Schiaparelliorbust]

The effects I listed are all of later sounds on earlier sounds, but your way could be interesting as well.
Translate says French uses the indicative there, and I would agree. The subjunctive is more for situations that are not implied to be real, for example "I doubt that *you ate nothing today*". My verb proposal uses <-is> for this meaning, along with a few others.
I agree that many of these affixes are redundant. One possible effect of appending adjectives to nouns is affixes like -(o)m attaching to the adjective instead of the noun (cf. the queen of England's crown=the queen's crown). This might be an interesting feature to have, even without compounding with adjectives. Speaking of adjectives, it might be helpful to have a suffix for converting a verb to an adjective or noun, eg <cakun> or <cakadun>->"dying", <cakutun>->"dead".

In Turkish we have like 4 different versions sometimes of a suffix depending on how the word ends. Example: -iyor, -ıyor, -üyor, -uyor. That might be a little too much for this language but maybe 2 versions could be nice. I highly agree with you that there should be an affix to make a verb an adjective or noun. I also want our language to have a special feature that we don't really borrow from another language, though I don't know what it should be.

[fluffykitty]

A vowel harmony system might be interesting. As far as I can tell, a simple height harmony system (each word uses either /aɪiu/ or /aɛeo/) would add that kind of variation to many affixes without causing any existing words to clash. One possible special feature would be declining nouns for intentionality (for example, "I eat" would most likely be intentional, but "We will die" would not be), although this is fairly similar to one factor in Ithkuil's case system, so it might be too unoriginal for your liking. However, I'm not aware of a system like this in any natural language. If we have a case system, this could be limited to only apply for some cases (eg nominative and accusative but not others).