Print

Print


En réponse à Sally Caves <[log in to unmask]>:

>
> My sentiments, too.  As for squids, however, their name in English
> (origin
> unknown, I think), completely belies the gracefulness of these sea
> creatures.  It sounds like "squirt," which seems to confine them to
> one
> function of theirs.

In French they are "calmar" or "calamar". I suppose you like those words
better ;)))) .

  Same with Octopus, "eight footer."

Directly from the Latin AFAIK. The French is "pieuvre".

  Another
> clunky
> sound for an even more beautiful animal.

True, and so intelligent!

  An octopus should be called
> something like "rilryalar" (making it up off the top of my head) to
> indicate
> the movements of its arms in the water.

I completely agree on this one! We may have similar aesthetics in this
case :)) . In other cases too, since I find Teonaht so beautiful :) .

>
> As for "lark," I can imagine how that would sound harsh to a
> francophone; to
> me, I associate it with music, with meadows, with hearing the sound of
> the
> lark in the morning.  What if we were to undo its consonant cluster,
> extend
> its monosyllable, to something like "larika" ... Doesn't that sound
> like
> "lyrical" to you, Christophe?

Indeed, but it stops being recognisably connected to "lark" to me :)) . "Lark"
sounds like I hit my palate with my tongue. Not an unpleasant sound at all, but
completely unfit for a small bird ;)) .

  That's how I think of it.  The lyrical
> lark.
> I rather like ar/ark/irik endings.  That may be the English in me!
>

I do like those endings too, don't take me wrong :)) . The word "lark" itself
is not bad-sounding. It's just unfit for its meaning ;)))) .

I would like to contribute with the Swedish word, lärka ['lEr'ka], very clearly related to the English word.

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.

/Micke

*Ordinary people do fucked-up things, when fucked-up things become ordinary.*