Print

Print


Conlangs and conworlds are works of fiction. Some may choose to go the route described below by Jim in creating their fictional language and/or world. I have chosen the fiction that Senjecas was instilled in the first loquent beings by the Creator: one sememe = one lexeme. Only later, when the other Peoples were created and began to use the language did the scenario below begin to take place. There are a few words in the Senjecas dictionary (not homonyms) that are specific to a particular People. Surely, PIE is not a first language. Maybe there were borrowings from Proto-Uralic. Maybe the speakers borrowed vocables from the Neanderthals.
BTW, I watched an interesting documentary on the Neanderthals a couple of weeks ago. It seems that their demise was due to a volcanic eruption in Italy which covered western Europe and eastern Asia with ash, leaving only a remnant in southwestern Europe. Apparently Homo sapiens was better at adapting to the new environment.
Charlie

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Thain <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sat, 25 Nov 2017 06:19:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Homonyms

I find the idea that homonyms wouldn't develop until daughter languages ...
strange. The 'first' people coining new words for, well, everything around
them are likely, in my opinion, to sometimes, by accident, coin words that
sound the same for different things. They might choose to discard one of
those because 'they sound the same', but that would show conscious control
of the language. As far as I have been able to find out human languages the
world over aren't a conscious design. people just remake old words for new
things, or coin new ones, without realizing there is one that sounds like
that already. They rarely seem to care about whether they are homonyms or
not. Otherwise I imagine there would be much pruning of the ambiguity
caused by them. Would such an original language have dialects also? I think
it would. Borrowing from other dialects could be another way for homonyms
to develop.

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 6:53 PM, C. Brickner <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I avoid homonyms in Senjecas. In its conworld Senjecas is the first
> language, the Ursprache. I should think that homonyms don't develop until a
> language develops and splits into daughter languages or borrows words from
> other languages.
> Charlie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeffrey Brown <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:39:43 -0500 (EST)
> Subject: Homonyms
>
> Do you have homonyms in your conlang?
> I noticed that I was avoiding creating a new word that was homonymous to an
> existing one in my conlang.
> Then, I realized: Natlangs have homonyms. Why not conlangs? So, I stopped
> avoiding them.
> Except for auxlangs, I cannot see any reason to avoid homonyms, especially
> as it may increase the naturalism of an artlang.
> What do all y'all think?
>