ConwayLife.com

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 3:15 am

/fsçx/ /ptck/ /mn/ /ljw/

I'm surprised that there is no /r/ sound.

Orthography (directly based on IPA):
/f/ = f
/s/ = s
/ç/ = xj*
/x/ = x
/p/ = p
/t/ = t
/c/ = c
/k/ = k
/m/ = m
/n/ = n
/l/ = l
/j/ = j
/w/ = w
(/r/ = r)?
*/ç/ is kind of like a /x/ sound but palatalized.

The vowels /aeiou/ can just be written aeiou, and the dipthongs /ai au ei eu oi/ can be written ai au ei eu oi.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 4:53 am

I found a Wikipedia article on assimilation, but not one one nasal assimilation. Could you give me an example? Or are the example words I gave already like that? Why does it matter whether we use the palatal nasal or velar nasal?

Yes, those words demonstrate nasal assimilation. The palatal-velar distinction matters because for /ɲc/ or /ŋg/ you don't have to move the point of contact between your tongue and the roof of your mouth, but for /ɲg/ and /ŋc/ you do.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 4:53 am

I've never heard "input" pronounced like that, but okay. Turkish has some things like that too. N became m in many words before b like "penbe"→"pembe"(pink). Also try and pronounce "thin" with an extra g at the end. It definitely sounds different from "thing".

Yep. Also, try pronouncing "thing" and "thin" without the final nasal. For me at least the "i"s sound different.

Entity Valkyrie 2 wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:00 am

I'm surprised that there is no /r/ sound.

[s]Rhotics are overrated.[/s]

Entity Valkyrie 2 wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:00 am

Orthography (directly based on IPA):
/f/ = f
/s/ = s
/ç/ = xj*
/x/ = x
/p/ = p
/t/ = t
/c/ = c
/k/ = k
/m/ = m
/n/ = n
/l/ = l
/j/ = j
/w/ = w
(/r/ = r)?
*/ç/ is kind of like a /x/ sound but palatalized.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 3:15 am

For orthography, the only non-Latin alphabet IPA character now is ç, which we could either keep as ç, or represent some other way (if we do that, I propose <h>, since the two sounds are already pretty similar and that's how Old English did it).

Entity Valkyrie 2 wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:00 am

The vowels /aeiou/ can just be written aeiou, and the dipthongs /ai au ei eu oi/ can be written ai au ei eu oi.

That works.

Adding to my three lists:
Maybe kos (short for gross) for 144?

Entity Valkyrie 2 wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:19 am

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 1:45 am

Phonology. Why would anyone want to begin wiht lexicon anyway? Only BokaBB would do that.

I written three list of numbers from 1 to 10, but all three may have problems:

Code: Select all

- Based on Romance
una
tas
tias#
kwata
sinka
sesa
septa
okta
nona
teka*

Code: Select all

- Based on Germanic
en
twa
ti#
fil#
fef
ses
sepen
akt
nin
ten

Code: Select all

- Based on Japanese and Chinese
i
al#
san
si
wo
loku#
ki
pa
kju
tju

# replaced rhotic

The word for "of" could be "te", since there is no voicing (therefore the almost-international "de" doesn't work)
I'll figure out pronouns?

While making the other language, I mentioned that it shouldn't have base-10, though my proposal wasn't listened to much. Can we please have it not be base-10?

Then what base? EDIT: what about base 12?

Entity Valkyrie 2 wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:24 am

Then what base? EDIT: what about base 12?

I like base-12. It is easy to write fractions. Base-8 could be interesting too.

Consonants, vowels, diphthongs in a jan Misali-like table:

We still need to make phonotactics. The simplest way would be to ban anything non-CVC, but we should probably have at least some consonant clusters in syllables. The most obvious ones are the affricates /pf/ /ts/ /cç/ /kx/. We could also have obstruent+/w/ or /l/ in onsets. Any other onset/coda clusters people want?

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:41 am

We still need to make phonotactics. The simplest way would be to ban anything non-CVC, but we should probably have at least some consonant clusters in syllables. The most obvious ones are the affricates /pf/ /ts/ /cç/ /kx/. We could also have obstruent+/w/ or /l/ in onsets. Any other onset/coda clusters people want?

I think everyone agrees that two plosives cannot be next to each other in a syllable, right? I think any consonant except for /ŋ/ and /x/ should hbe able to be the onset of a syllable. Maybe /ç/ too. Any other non-onset consonants?

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 1:25 am

Since BokaBB's language entered The 1984 Campaign and is not a collabrative project at all, here.

We'll progress slowly, steadily, properly, and there will be no bullying. There will also be no Discord, no Google, and so on.

THIS
MEANS
WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shyu ngongom gesan!

BokaBB

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:51 am

I think everyone agrees that two plosives cannot be next to each other in a syllable, right?

Not Ancient Greeks.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:51 am

I think any consonant except for /ŋ/ and /x/ should hbe able to be the onset of a syllable. Maybe /ç/ too. Any other non-onset consonants?

I think /ç/ and /x/ should be allowed in onsets. Also, did you agree to use word-final <ng> for /ŋ/?

BokaBB wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:53 am

THIS
MEANS
WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Contribute or leave.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:57 am

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:51 am

I think everyone agrees that two plosives cannot be next to each other in a syllable, right?

Not Ancient Greeks.

How?

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:57 am

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:51 am

I think any consonant except for /ŋ/ and /x/ should hbe able to be the onset of a syllable. Maybe /ç/ too. Any other non-onset consonants?

I think /ç/ and /x/ should be allowed in onsets. Also, did you agree to use word-final <ng> for /ŋ/?

I think n before palatals should be /ŋ/. If there are any problems with this, please tell me.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:05 am

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:57 am

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 5:51 am

I think everyone agrees that two plosives cannot be next to each other in a syllable, right?

Not Ancient Greeks.

How?

By pronouncing two stops in an onset. In fact, English also has adjacent stops in a single syllable (eg "apt").

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:05 am

I think n before palatals should be /ŋ/. If there are any problems with this, please tell me.

/ŋ/ is the velar nasal and most naturally assimilates with velars. The palatal nasal is /ɲ/. Also, did you agree to use word-final <ng> for /ŋ/?

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:09 am

By pronouncing two stops in an onset. In fact, English also has adjacent stops in a single syllable (eg "apt").

I never realized that. It sounds so normal. Should we have it in this language?

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:09 am

/ŋ/ is the velar nasal and most naturally assimilates with velars. The palatal nasal is /ɲ/. Also, did you agree to use word-final <ng> for /ŋ/?

I guess I am. I honestly think that it should always be like that as long as they're in the same syllable.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:16 am

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:09 am

By pronouncing two stops in an onset. In fact, English also has adjacent stops in a single syllable (eg "apt").

I never realized that. It sounds so normal. Should we have it in this language?

I vote no. AFAIK English only allows /pt/ and /kt/ for coda stop clusters, and /ct/ doesn't seem to work very well.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:16 am

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:09 am

/ŋ/ is the velar nasal and most naturally assimilates with velars. The palatal nasal is /ɲ/. Also, did you agree to use word-final <ng> for /ŋ/?

I guess I am. I honestly think that it should always be like that as long as they're in the same syllable.

I just remembered that we don't have phonemic /g/, so there's no annoying conflicts with using <g> for a digraph.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:26 am

I vote no. AFAIK English only allows /pt/ and /kt/ for coda stop clusters, and /ct/ doesn't seem to work very well.

Ok then.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:26 am

I just remembered that we don't have phonemic /g/, so there's no annoying conflicts with using <g> for a digraph.

Do we not have it on purpose? I think I also remember us not distinguishing between /p/ and /b/. I don't see b in the table Entity Valkyrie 2 made.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:31 am

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:26 am

I just remembered that we don't have phonemic /g/, so there's no annoying conflicts with using <g> for a digraph.

Do we not have it on purpose? I think I also remember us not distinguishing between /p/ and /b/. I don't see b in the table Entity Valkyrie 2 made.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 3:15 am

We could eliminate phonemic voiced obstruents entirely and only have them show up as allophones of their voiceless counterparts (eg /tipon/->/tibon/).

We could reinstate them, but the palatals and ɣ would make the orthography more complicated.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:35 am

We could reinstate them, but the palatals and ɣ would make the orthography more complicated.

How would that happen?

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:46 am

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:35 am

We could reinstate them, but the palatals and ɣ would make the orthography more complicated.

How would that happen?

We would need some way of representing /ɟʝɣ/.

fluffykitty wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 6:50 am

We would need some way of representing /ɟʝɣ/.

I mean, how would adding /b/ cause this? Would we need to have a voiced counterpart for all consonants?

Excellent. But also maybe have y = /y/ (or Chinese ü), so that we have three rounded and three unrounded.

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:28 am

Excellent. But also maybe have y = /y/ (or Chinese ü), so that we have three rounded and three unrounded.

What about /œ/?

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:41 am

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:28 am

Excellent. But also maybe have y = /y/ (or Chinese ü), so that we have three rounded and three unrounded.

What about /œ/?

How would you represent it? oe?

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:48 am

How would you represent it? oe?

ö. If that is hard to type, then we could do oe.

Schiaparelliorbust wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:49 am

Hunting wrote: ↑

November 12th, 2020, 7:48 am

How would you represent it? oe?

ö. If that is hard to type, then we could do oe.

Wait, did we decide on alphabet yet? I think we can choose wisely here without the BokaBB hammer.