Print

Print


p.s. sorry about the absent-minded mistakes.

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Katerina <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>
>
>
> *> Not sure if you'd consider this a good thing or a bad thing, but I'm
> pretty sure every one of these (or something close) is attested in some
> natlang. If you want things that are "naturalistic" but rare, then that's
> good. *
>
> that's exactly what i had in mind - features that are relatively uncommon
> in existing human languages, but do occur in some of them. after all, i
> would want the conlang to be possible to pronounce. :)
>
> think klingon but not quite with the same flavor. all in all, i was
> looking for a sound that might be considered harsh yet melodic in its own
> distinctive way. after all, i'd want the conlang to be possible to
> pronounce. :) what comes to mind first is synaesthetic imagery like a
> medium-sized mountain stream falling down a ledge or a sword flashing in
> bright sunlight, but that probably doesn't make a great deal of sense.
>
> the t'elχ are a non-humanoid race with a highly developed collective
> intelligence who have no vocal chords comparable to ours, and the primary
> use of the language is for their shared internal monologue, but it can
> potentially be spoken aloud by an assimilated human. the same word is used
> for "speech, verbal communication" and "song" and our protagonist, a human
> biologist assimilated, separated and re-assimilated by the t'elχ, would
> consistently describe her experience of belonging to their collective
> consciousness as "singing together as one", so i've been trying to create a
> more liquid, flowing feel - abundant non-rhotic sonorants, aspirated or
> not, an agglutinative morphology and active incorporation of the
> chukchi/nivkh type resulting in lengthy words, phonemic changes triggered
> by syntactic context (as in nivkh), a rich vocalic inventory (though i see
> several possibilities there and haven't settled on any single one). at the
> same time, i see the language as having quite a few elements with the
> potential of being perceived as abrupt, sharp and unpleasant to human ears,
> hence the broad range of fricative and affricate phonemes, the ejectives,
> the aspirated plosives and the widespread use of the glottal and epiglottal
> stop (as in itelmen).
>
> one might also imagine hissing, whistling, chirping, creaking or rustling
> noises, the sort that would come across as alien and be associated with a
> (somewhat) insectoid species.
>
>
>
>
> *> I hear/read about this quite a lot, but I suspect that's largely a
> selection effect- the languages that have these huge clusters get talked
> about a lot precisely because they are weird. Berber, Caucasian languages,
> and Salish languages are classic examples.*
>
> the caucasian languages and itelmen are what i had in mind when i was
> compiling the table. not sure whether this is true of other caucasian
> languages, but it's interesting that in georgian, while the consonant
> clusters can be quite long (up to 7-8 in some cases), they are pronounced
> very lightly and the language as a whole has a melodic, flowing sound.
> itelmen has much the same consonant concentration and a similar feel, and i
> guess that was the overall impression i was aiming at in t'elχ.
>
> i haven't gotten round to researching the salishan languages to any
> serious extent but i did have a glimpse at basic nuxalk grammar and
> phonology and found them fascinating (and a little intimidating - i'm not
> sure i would be able to master this kind of complexity).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *> Highly asymmetric inventories are pretty unusual. I don't think, for
> example that there are any known natlangs with, e.g. 5 front vowels and no
> back vowels, or 5 back vowels and no front vowels. Rounded front vowels but
> no rounded back vowels would also be strange, as well as diagonal
> inventories, like high front and low back but no low front or high back, or
> vice-versa.*
>
> thanks! what i have so far is this http://moonflower77.
> dreamwidth.org/180982.html
>
> i started out combining the basic vowel frameworks of italian, japanese,
> itelmen and hungarian, all of them relatively simple and straightforward,
> but later introduced some sounds from thai and mandarin which i liked and
> could see (hear) in t'elχ.
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19 April 2017 at 04:50, Katerina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> [...]
>> > i've just started to revise my conlang, which is now called t'elχ, and
>> have
>> > been thinking of the potential phonological features it might have that
>> > would be unusual for most natural languages and could help create a more
>> > alien sound. the ones i have thought of so far are as follows:
>>
>> Not sure if you'd consider this a good thing or a bad thing, but I'm
>> pretty sure every one of these (or something close) is attested in
>> some natlang. If you want things that are "naturalistic" but rare,
>> then that's good. If, on the other hand, your definition of sufficient
>> alienness is "no human language ever does this", you may have to try
>> harder!
>>
>> > a) extensive consonant clusters (up to 8 consonants not separated by a
>> > glottal stop or epenthetic vowel);
>>
>> I hear/read about this quite a lot, but I suspect that's largely a
>> selection effect- the languages that have these huge clusters get
>> talked about a lot precisely because they are weird. Berber, Caucasian
>> languages, and Salish languages are classic examples.
>>
>> > b) a phonemic distinction between voiced and voiceless nasals;
>> > c) a phonemic distinction between voiced and voiceless lateral
>> approximants;
>> > d) full range of nasal and lateral approximant phonemes (voiced and
>> > voiceless);
>> > e) absence of any voiced plosives;
>>
>> This isn't terribly weird. Lack of voiced *phones* may be a little
>> more weird, but there are lots of language which only have voiceless
>> plosive phonemes- see Polynesian languages for examples.
>>
>> > f) a phonemic distinction between non-aspirated aspirated (murmured or
>> > breathy-voiced) nasals and lateral approximants;
>> > g) the presence of aspirated fricatives and a three-way distinction
>> between
>> > voiceless, ejective and aspirated fricatives;
>> > h) a three-way distinction between plain (tenuis), ejective and
>> aspirated
>> > plosives;
>> > i) one of the most common consonant sounds, [t], is present, but [k] is
>> > absent;
>>
>> Hawaiian kind of does this. Both [t] and [k] are present, but they are
>> allophones of a single /k/ phoneme.
>>
>> > j) the presence of retroflex consonants (laminal or apical, without
>> > r-coloring);
>>
>> This may be "alien" to Anglophones, but again lots of natlangs have these.
>>
>> > k) absence of any rhotic consonants, r-colored vowels or rhoticization
>> > processes.
>>
>> That's much more unusual, but also attested.
>>
>> > perhaps you could suggest any more? in particular, it'd be interesting
>> to
>> > hear what would be less usual with respect to vowels as i haven't
>> > researched the topic quite as extensively.
>>
>> Highly asymmetric inventories are pretty unusual. I don't think, for
>> example that there are any known natlangs with, e.g. 5 front vowels
>> and no back vowels, or 5 back vowels and no front vowels. Rounded
>> front vowels but no rounded back vowels would also be strange, as well
>> as diagonal inventories, like high front and low back but no low front
>> or high back, or vice-versa.
>>
>> -l.
>>
>
>