Print

Print


    First, let me correct a couple of typos in my last post.
I  (mis)wrote:

> a - go`g -slr` = (the process of being) the taste of honey
> a - tun - slr` = (the process of being)  the sticky feel of honey

The taste infix should be |  go`g~ |,  not  | go`g |.
        (  |g| = [g]; | g~|  =  [N]  ).

The touch infix should be | tuhn |, not | tun |.
         (  |u| = [u];  |uh| = [V] or [@]  ).



    ---------------------------------------------

On 11 June, Jesse Bangs wrote:


>Instead of the horribly abstract "the process of being blood", mightn't we
>use a word meaning "to bleed."

    Not really. It is hard to use a lang like English, which views
the world as full of "things" and "actions" to describe a worldview
based on "developing processes".
    "Being blood" is the best I can do to try to describe the
development of the liquid from a number of perspectives,
including development from an embryonic precursor,
through its development as what is commonly understood as "blood",
to whatever it ultimately changes into after death (or indeed, after
it is bled out), and development of its components from cellular production,
inhaled/exhaled gasses, ingested foods, and infecting agents, etc.
via its development as "blood" , to its development as liquid waste
passed out through the kidneys (or again, bled out or decomposed, etc).
    In its "usual" condition, by the rtemmu view, "blood" is not a static
"thing". It is always in a state of flux. The word  | w'oduh | refers to a
"slice" of the development, the boundaries of which are learned when one
acquires the word.
    "To bleed", by contrast, involves additional developments, including
developing change in location and possible change to the developing
life of the organism (for good or for bad), among other developments.


>Peculiar.  Even in unpolluted places under blue skies, water is not
>necessarily blue.  Beware of letting cultural associations seep across
>unknowingly.

    Hey! That's usually _my_ line! But you are perfectly right.
Thanks for the reminder.
    For that mattter, "blood" is not always red! Only if it is
oxygenated! Deoxygenated blood is dark purple to black in color.
    So, if I still wanted to use blood as a touchstone for the color red,
I should probably stress _oxygenated_ blood. In rtemmu, this would
probably involve a compound:
           |  xvoxo`gw'oduh |
            xvox  =  (the process of being) oxygen
            o`g  =  compounding particle
            w'oduh = (the process of being) blood

    This brings up a question that I haven't as yet considered:
where to put infixes in a compound! Perhaps the placement would be
constrained by real-world facts --- I mean, what would it mean
to write | xvo-yai-x |, or oxygen-color, since oxygen is a colorless gas.
Or by putting the infix there, would one be subtly hinting that
it's the oxygen which is responsible for blood's red color? Or should the
infix go with the | w'oduh |, since it is towards the blood, not the oxygen,
that the listener's attention is being directed for evidence of color?
Or would it all be merely a matter of emphasis?
    And what would it mean to put the infix inside of the conjunction
( | xvox-o`yaig-w'oduh | )?
    Interesting questions! Thanks, Jesse, for helping me see them!


>In Homer, the sea is often purplish (the color of wine, or
>"porphuros" if I remember the word right.)

    Now,  I don't know what kind of sea Homer was talking about
(except that if it was the Mediterranean, it was probably a whole lot
cleaner than it is today!  ;-)  ) under what kind of conditions. And I
don't know what kind of wine he drank. All I _can_ say is that
the south-eastern end of the Med that I see all the time, when
under a cloudless blue sky (especially in winter, if the air is still and
cool) is nothing like any wine that I have ever seen! It's a very
beautiful shade of blue! In fact, I've never seen a purple sea!
(I've never seen a purple cow, either   ;-)  but that's something else!   )
    Perhaps Homer was referring to a patch of water during some
sort of biological bloom. (IIRC, parts of the Red Sea, sometimes
turn red for this reason.)
    But your basic argument, Jesse, is correct. Water takes on many
colors depending upon location, conditions and time of day,
among other things. Perhaps I shouldn't use it as the basis for a
color-word.


>This reminds me of Thai, where there is a word /si:/ that means "color
>of."  It can be used with almost anything to make a color name, e.g.:
>/si:som/ = color of orange (fruit) = orange
>/si:kha:w/ = color of rice = white
>/si:gaNgeNyi:n/ = color of jeans = denimy blue

>However, I think that using this to describe *all* colors is unnatural.
>Even in Thai, the most basic colors (black, red, and a few others) are
>derived from things that have no meaning other than their color.  I would
>suggest putting a few unanalyzable colors in there, just to liven things
>up a bit.

    Thanks for the suggestion. I'll have to think about it.

           -----------------------------------------------------------


    On 11 June,  J Y S Czhang wrote:


>   WoW... ooooh! true nice-ness... a synaethesiac infix!

    Back in 5 December, 2001, I posted to the list how
one would go about describing synaethesia in rtemmu. Briefly:

the 2 senses involved have their infixes joined by the conjunction
|  sehmu  |. This conjunction indicates that what precedes | sehmu |
develops into what follows it.
    So, for sounds which are perceived as colors, the sensory
infix would be |  -lorsehmuyai-  |; while for colors which are
percieved as sounds, the infix would be |  -yaisehmulor-  |.
    |  -klif-  |, on the other hand, involves _simultaneous_
experience of multiple senses: the sight _and_ sound of a movie;
the sight, sound, smell, taste, _and_ feel of food. The number of
senses is not implied by the infix; only that more than one are involved.
Clarification depends upon context.

>    I have been sorta following rtemmu and I find it is thoroughly,
>impressively neat-o, Dan. ::clap-clap::

    Thanks!  < G >

>    Having audio-visual synaethesia, I really oughta have something similar
>(perhaps a sensory aspect particle?) in my conlang creolego.

    Go for it!

>[Great...jeepers-creepers, for the rest of the day I am gonna be
>brainsturmin' and brain-fartin' on this idea...]

Please post the results! I'd love to see what you came up with!



        Dan Sulani
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
likehsna rtem zuv tikuhnuh auag inuvuz vaka'a

A word is an awesome thing.