Print

Print


--- On Sat, 5/28/11, Wm Annis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> After I have the rules of word
> formation in place, I run those rules
> through a program that can generate several thousand
> examples of
> good words.  Once I've verified they are in fact good
> (I might tweak
> the syllable shapes somewhat), I just save a file with a
> list of a few
> thousand.  When a new concept needs a word, I go
> through that
> file to find a word I like for the concept.
> 
> Second, creating a vocabulary list is one of the first
> things I do
> when making a new language, even before all the sound
> details are
> worked out.  I keep the list more or less alphabetical
> (easier on a
> computer), so I don't often accidentally recreate a
> word.  A *few*
> recreated words wouldn't be that big a deal anyway - this
> happens
> in natural languages all the time.

That's the procedure I followed with both Kash and Gwr (Gwr's were proto-forms). It helped that both were fairly simple, mostly (C)VCV(C) with just a few other possibilities. By now the permitted structures are so well internalized that I no longer need to consult the list of possible forms :-))) and by checking the fairly complete dictionaries I can see if I've re-created a form with another meaning. As William says, a few homophones don't matter, esp. if they're different parts of speech that won't occur in the same slots.

Modern Kash (and presumably proto- when I get around to it) can form related words/meanings by modifying sounds in the fricative-stop-nasalized stop series at each POA, so we get tixas 'glimpse', tikas 'see', tingas 'inspect'