Faraneit

Faranit
Pronounced:	/fɑr-ɑn-It/
Timeline and Universe:	theoretically this universe, future
Species:	Humanoid
Spoken:	Northwest and central Lhined
Total speakers:	~10 million
Writing system:	Own and Romanized Equivalent
Genealogy:	Unknown, assumed to be derived from Hungarian, Quechua(s), and Hindi daughter languages, although evidence is very conjectural
Typology
Morphological type:	Agglutative (and sometimes isolating)
Morphosyntactic alignment:	Nominative-Accusative
Basic word order:	VSO
Credits
Creator:	Humancadaver101 aka Schwhatever aka Buckfush530
Created:	December 2004

Faranit is the most prominent dialect of the Faranih people on the continent of Lhined on a currently undiscovered planet. The various colonizers traveled to this planet on the eve of a massive worldwide war on Earth. It is most closely linked to the Hindi, Quecha, and Hungarian colonizers, which attempted to colonize several regions directly on the western edge of the current range of the language.

Faranit vs. Faranih vs. Faraneih

• Faranit -means only the language
• Faranih -originally meant only the ethnic group, but recently colloquially came to mean the language as well
• Faraneih -is a colloquial term for the ethnicity

Phonology/Orthography (in IPA)

• Consonants: /d ʕ b f θ ʔ ʒ k l ɭ m n p q ʀ s t v z ç/
  • Romanized As: <d c b f fh h j k l lh m n p q r s t v z sc>
• Vowels: /ɑ e ɛ i ɪ ɔ o u ʊ/
  • Romanized As: <a ae e ei i o oe u ue>
• Allophones:
  • medial /ç/ is pronounced [ʃ] (Poelisem Faranik - in all positions)
  • medial /θ/ is pronounced [ð]
  • terminal /ʔ/ is pronounced [h] or [ɦ] depending on dialect
  • medial /ʁ/ is pronounced [ɾ] in all dialects
  • terminal /ʁ/ is pronounced [ʁˢ] in the OLF and SLF dialects.
• Phonological Constraints: CVC(VC)

Phonology Chart

	Bilabial	Labio-Dental	Dental	Alveolar	Post-Alveolar	Retroflex	Palatal	Velar	Uvular	Pharyngeal	Glottal
Stop	p  b			t  d				k	q		ʔ
Nasal	m		n
Fricative		f  v	θ	s  z	ʃ  ʒ		ç			ʕ
Approximant									ʁ
Lateral Flap				l		ɭ

Syntax

Faranit is VSO and generally aggulating. Negatives are placed behind verbs like adverbs and other modifiers (except geographic), including subordinate clauses. An example:

Karoetaejeih hav lhaefh nih joekesc-e-niris cih zelojih noer daekin vit heim.
do.PRES.IND.1P I thus DAT butter-*-your RELA.CONJ stole.PAST.IND.2P thou it.ACC LAT me.
I'm doing thus to your butter that you stole from me.

All subordinate clauses are signalled with "cih". It roughly can meet the definitions of the English "that", both as a relative conjunction and a general conjunction.

When a relative clause for an object, the verb is conjugated for the second subject after cih.

Bonicaejih noer joekesc, cih raejih noer.
eat.PRES.IND.2P 2P.SING.NOM butter, that have.PRES.IND.2P 2P.SING.NOM.
You are eating the butter, that you have.

The verb is not conjugated, however, when it is a relative clause for the existing subject.

Bonicaejih noer joekesc, cih kaej laevitoem.
eat.PRES.IND.2P 2P.SING.NOM butter, that be.PRES.IND_____ butter, butter.
You are eating butter, that "be" good.

Geographic modifiers (ex. English, Chinese, Australian) are formed from contextual placement. General form is to superimpose the place name before the noun to be modified. For example:

Roem Faseir!
The Roman Alphabet!
literally: Rome Alphabet!

The Poelisem dialect avoids this and has created a new class of adjectives in response.

Insertion of zihin (if the assumed answer is no) or hanit (if the assumed answer is yes) is used to form yes-no interrogative clauses.

kurojeih hav daekin nih moekin, hanit?
give.PAST.IND.1P I.NOM it.ACC DAT you.SING.ACC, correct?
I gave it to you, right?

kurojih noer daekin nih hav, zihin? 
give.PAST.IND.2P you.SING.NOM it.ACC DAT me.NOM, incorrect?
You gave it to me, or not?

Open ended interrogative sentences are formed by substituting an interrogative pronoun for the subject of object.

nuescojih noer nakeir?
use.PAST.IND.2P you.SING.NOM which/what(.ACC)?
You used which?

dopojoh nakeir lhaefh?
cause.PAST.IND.2P which/what(.NOM) thus/this?
What caused this?

Pronouns usually decline by case, but in certain forms use participles like nouns. Verbs conjugate based on tense (remote past, near past, present, future), mood (subjunctive, indicative, and in archaic dialects imperative), and person (first, second, and third). Pronouns decline for person(first, second, third, and fourth), number (singular and plural), case (nominative, accusitive, possessive, and in plural forms dative/ablative), and animacy/gender(he/she - it in most forms; see dialects for more information). For nouns the dative/ablative is formed from participles and nominative and accusitive are assumed from context and word order.

Various examples of agglutination abound, including the syntax of possessives and listings.

poresc-e-hez
city-*-mine
my city

This is also true for more general possessives.

poresc-e-huesc
city-*-man
(the) man's city

A similar construction is used for forming lists. (Technically this is a dvandva)

halaejeih hav faranit-i-timeritah
speak I faranit-*-etimri
I speak faranit (and) etimri

Various irregularities appear in colloquial conversation, however. Such as:

kaejeihav laetin
be.PRES.IND.1P.SING happy
(I) am happy

The pronoun, hav, has been absorbed into the verb, due to the erosion of the /ʔ.ʔ/ into /ʔ/ in this frequently written and spoken situation. In the Orthodox Laescelh Dialect, a similar construction is visible in the third person:

kaejom scoet
be.PRES.IND.3P.SING.INANI white
(It) is white

as well as

kaejon faraneih
((S)He) is Faraneih

The first is often used similarly to "il y a" in French, with the second mirroring the English "he's" and "she's".

These colloquial examples further the evidence that Faranit is in the process of a linguistic shift. It is incorporating the pronoun into the verb, eroding it into the verb ending. It is possible that Faranit may become polysynthetic. A similar shift is observable in various celtic languages, which preserved the Italo-Celtic pronouns, but only partially agglutinated them into the verb as was done completely in Latin.

Imperatives are formed similarly to many Indo-European languages with the omission of the subject.

karoetijih daekin
do.FUT.IND.2P it.ACC
(Go) do it

Faranit, however, accepts third person imperatives as forceful suggestions (as opposed to subjunctive imperatives).

karoetijoh daekin
do.FUT.IND.3P it.ACC
(He must go) do it

To create more gentle commands or suggestions, the imperative, in the subjunctive mood, is also used.

karoetinih daekin
do.FUT.SUBJ.2P it.ACC
(You should go) do it

This is also capably used in the third person.

karoetinoh daekin
do.FUT.SUBJ.3P it.ACC
(He should go) do it

A few archaic dialects (along the western chapparel) retain an imperative mood where the subject can be omitted if so desired. The mood's infix is -d- and is regularly conjugated.

karoetidoh don daekin = karoetidoh daekin
do.FUT.IMP.3P (s)he.NOM it.ACC = do.FUT.IMP.3P it.ACC
He (must go) do it = (He must go) do it

Another strange usage is that infinitives decline for tense and mood when a part of the predicate. For example-

fuezijeihav halij faranit boscoem
learn.FUT.IND.1P.1P.SING speak.FUT.IND faranit proper
I will learn to speak (future) proper faranit

and also-

fuezoneihav halon faranit boscoem
learn.PAST.SUBJ.1P.1P.SING speak.PAST.SUBJ faranit proper
I may have learned to (subjunctive) have spoken (past) proper faranit.

whereas-

fuezijohav halaej faranit boscoem
learn.PAST.IND.1P.1P.SING speak.PRES.IND proper faranit
I learned to speak (and have continued to) proper faranit.

or

fuezijohav halij faranit boscoem
learn.PAST.IND.1P.1P.SING speak.FUT.IND faranit proper
I learned to speak (and will continue to) proper faranit.

This is often used as a method to signify progressive past tenses, which either continue from the distant past (-ue-) to the recent past (-o-), either past to the present (-ae-), or any non-future tense and the future (-i-).

The animacy distinction is quite flexible and can be used to denote various aspects of the speakers perception. A popular example is the difference between,

kaejom, hamaet, hilin
be.PRES.3P.INANI (blaze) short

and

kaejon joj, hamaet, hilin
be.PRES.3P.ANI presently (blaze) short

The use of the inanimate in the first stresses the static state of the fire as well as its theoretically harmless appearance. On the other hand, the animate gender and the use of the adverb joj, presently, suggests a danger posed from the fire from its independent movement, in addition to the threat posed from a change in state. This is conventional usage with common objects that do not conform to the distinction, that inanimate objects are static and still, while animate objects are changing and move independently.

Religious beliefs also enter the equation. A Hakih, and many other smaller sects always use animate pronouns nearly universally with animals, especially livestock. The Hakih and the Harapah use animate pronouns with animals on an irregular basis, only when praising or sacrificing usually. The Poeleizih, on the other hand, have merged the inanimate to a new level, using it commonly for insults and often to degrade women, however, this is more of an anthropological and ideological distinction than a linguistic one.

Slang

Slang has become prolific as in some dialects, particularly the re-irregularization of the verb "kaej" which was always highly volatile in the Faranit language, as it unnaturally was regularized during the colonization of Laescelh. The highly isolated surroundings and the extreme social pressures are believed by some theorists to be significant contributors to this bizarre regularization campaign. In the diverging dialects currently there are several varying descrepancies plaguing "kaej."

In Poelisem Faranik, only largely grammatical changes have occured around "kaej" as it is commonly in short hand not used with a pronoun, as person (but not number) is noted on the "proper" forms of the verb.

In both Orthodox Laescelh Faranit, as well as the increasingly common Kupimiceh trader dialects, there are several more unusual contractions in speech. For example,

Formal Standard Faranit: Kaejeih hav.
Colloquial Standard Faranit: Kaejeihav.
Orthodox Laescelh Faranit and trade dialects: Kav.
English: I am.

As listed above in Syntax, there are other standard colloquial contractions. In addition, however, OLF and the trader dialects have even shorter forms, particularly:

FSF: Kaejoh don.
CSF: Kaejon.
OLF and trader dialects: Kon.
English: (S)He is.

as well as,

FSF: Kaejih noer.
CSF: Kaejih noer.
OLF and trader dialects: Kuer.
English: Thou art.

In these dialects, as well, the Poelisem practice of often dropping unabsorbed pronouns is increasingly common, especially for froms that lack current contractions, which may or may not be invented later by speakers.

The Southwestern Laescelh Faranit dialect on the other hand omits the infixes denoting present tense and indicative mood for kaej (and increasingly other verbs) when not needed for clarity. Such that:

FSF: Kaejeih hav
SLF: Keih hav
English: I am

For more detail see Faranit Dialectical Slang.

Stress and Pitch

Stress usually falls on the first syllable:

HAN-ak-elh-in
heaven

Deviations, however, are not difficult to find:

fhen-OET
field(s)

The Stress-Pitch system is very simplistic. Stressed accents have high pitch, while all others have low pitch.

fhen-OET
LH

HAN-ak-elh-in
HLLL

Voice

Passive voice is nonexistent, aside from the use of kaej, to be, as a descriptor. This results in dependence on teripes the genderless, numberless fourth person, when the subject is unknown. Reflexive is formed from the accusitive form of the appropriate pronoun.

Conjugation

Root + AE(present)/I(future)/O(recent past)/UE(distant past) + J(indicative)/N(conditional/subjunctive) + EIH(1p)/IH(2p)/OH(3p and 4p)

Dialects

The largest distinction is present between Laescelh Faranit and Poelisem Faranik (the version of Faranit supplanted into southern Malaba). Poelisem Faranik replaces the she/he-it pronoun system with a he-she/it organization, although this is more exemplary of their philosophical views on women. The most obvious difference, however, is the shift of all terminal /t/ becoming /k/. This did not affect internal or initial stops. For example:

Fhenoet (Laescelh Faranit) --> Fhenaok (Poelisem Faranik) 

The terminal vowel <oe>(/o/) became <ao>(/ɤ/) due to the second shift: derounding. Rounded vowels after a nasal or voiceless stop became unrounded unless the following consonant was an approximant or a second nasal. /œ/ shifted quickly to /ɛ/. The other unrounded vowel, /o/, shifted to /ɤ/. On a related note, instead of remaining /œ/, all /œ/ after a nasal shifted to /o/ when not followed by an approximant or nasal.

These shifts created the new vowel /ɤ/, which was not present in Laescelh Faranit. Interestingly the vowel shift is noted in written speech, although the imperfect consonant change is not yet distinguished from the original in writings and only sparingly in speech.

Additionally the consonant /ʃ/ shifted finally and initially where /ç/ had existed before, completing a process slowly occuring within Laescelh Faranit.

Poelisem Faranik changed grammatically aswell. The superimposing system in Laescelh Faranit was replaced by a specialized modifier ending attached to the place name. Instead of the convention adjective endings of -oem, -en, or -in, Poelisem Faranik created a special marker of -em for geographic modifiers. Poelisem Faranik maintained the unorthodox position of the adjective, nonetheless. For example:

In Laescelh they speak Laescelh Faranit.
In Poelisah they speak Poelisem Faranik.

A smaller distinction is made between Southwestern Laescelh Faranit (SLF) and Orthodox Laescelh Faranit (OLF). SLF replaces all /n/ in OLF with /ɲ/ when medial and final after a back vowel. The distinction is not noted in text and only orally in comic, regional stereotyping.

History and Culture

The Faranih culture is beleived to have arisen circa 1500 AC (after colonization), when a variety of refugees from the final collapse of the Temenucha civilization (derived from both Hindi and Quencha speakers) moved southward across the Kupimiceh desert and into the "mediterranean" coastal plain and absorbed into the colonizers from the collapsed Guscek colony of Hungarians, who had relocated to from the southern plains. The cultures creolized to some degree and expanded as far south as the Trovog peninsula (Timeritah in Faranit).

The extinction of the indigenous, omnivore reptoids left the cavernous, food producing, hollow trunks of the puzeil trees available, leading to their adoption as an emergency shelter (not large enough for more than three children, unfortunately), food source (edible roots available from the hollow area), wood, and companion to a variety of edible and medicinal mosses. By 2000 AC this arangement had given way to fullscale horticulture. The subsequent increase in population pushed the excess out of mescinefh (the forest of the mediterranean coastal plain) and east to the Laescelh, the hilly region seperating the humid subtropical savannahs-grasslands and mediterranean coastal chapparel. The region was largely uninhabited because its western border was the driest area of the chapparel and its northern and eastern border was outside of the main path of the monsoons, which passed over the grassland, leaving little rainfall, until unloading on Laescelh, because of its slightly higher elevation. The hills also contained a valuable domesticate: Amaranth.

Amaranth had feralized after colonization, allowing it to develope into a naturalized and highly productive grain. After arriving before 3000 AC a small scale agricultural package was created circa 3500 by combining Amaranth (aka fhequt) and puzeil and gathering various fruits and vegetables. By 5000 AC noepav, a leafy vegetable, vonabep, a fiber crop, liroedez, a melon, had been domesticated along with several more localized crops and goats had been introduced from the east. By 5500 AC the wheel was developed and Hidiviz, a spice, was introduced.

From 6000 AC onwards, the Faranih dominated trade between the Southeastern Cang-ur, Northeastern Malaba, and the Southeastern Etimri. Circa 7000 AC, the Poeleizih, a militant fringe religious group, invaded southern Malaba and attempted to create a sacred theocratic nation, Poelisah, there under their rule. The Poeleizih radicals steadily drifted to even more radical ideals, until circa 7500 AC declaring their patron god, Poelesc, the only true god and began actively persecuting polytheists and in 7600 threatening the Faranih heartland, Laescelh, which had remained polytheistic, with invasion. In response the most populous and productive region dominated by the Hakih, devotees to Hakaenah, the water goddess, banned together under the leadership of the militaristic Hirih, devotees to Hirelanah, goddess of vengence and storms. This new and successful relationship became the Harapah. Unfortunately this system proved no more noble than Poelisah and was fraught with internal corruption and a hierarchy supported by ruthless oppression of political opponents.

A later Poeleizih invasion(circa 7650) was more successful and managed to install the Poeleizih in power in several non-Harapah areas. The ballad of Lheletaeh, the Lheletimen, is the story of the driving of these occupying forces out of the city of Hejaz and the establishment of the Hejazarifh (circa 7660), a sacred state surrounding Hejaz, which denied access to certain groups as an official, very public form of disapproval. Historically, both the Harapah and the Poeleizih have been denied entrance. After the invasion of Hejaz by the Harapah circa 7800, the predominately Hamedih, Helescih, and Levezih inhabitants relocated to the semi-arid mountains in the north-central Kupimiceh desert and founded Hejarin, meaning new Hejaz.

After conquering the Hejarifh and other minor states in Laescelh, the Harapah began to solidify its base by combining many aspects of the Hakih and Hirih sects. Although generally successful, the merge drove many devout followers of both to radical extremism, seperatism, and in some cases warfare. The internal divisions quickly healed with the expulsion of the Hakih seperatists into distant Etimri areas and the self-propelled relocation of the Hirih radicals into traditional Cang-Ur lands. In reality, however, this only exported the troubles elsewhere, particularly into the western Cang-Ur tribal regions, which were heavily depopulated of the indigenous inhabitants by the Hirih settlers. That conquered region mirrored the developement of Poelisah, the Poeleizih stronghold in southern Malaba, especially in it's eventual dissolution into utter theocracy. The overlying societal stresses augmented the already dangerous deforestation in the region, which ultimately lead to a devestating collapse into anarchy and mass exodus into the eastern shrub, into which an estimated three million emigrated, only to succumb to starvation (circa 7950 AC).

Faranit Lexicon

Faranit Lexicon

Faranit Pronouns

Faranit Pronouns

Faranit Number System

The Faranit number system is base-ten.

number	Laescelh Faranit	Poelisem Faranik
1	Hev (/ʔɛv/	Hev
2	Fhikah (/θɪk-æʔ/)	Fhikah
3	Bes (/bɛs/)	Bes
4	Tasip (/tæs-ɪp/)	Tasip
5	Sureh ([suɾ-ɛʔ])	Sureh
6	Pukaet (/puk-et/)	Pukaek (/puk-ek/)
7	Kuet (/kʊt/)	Kek (/kɛk/)
8	Boetav (/bot-æv/)	Boetav
9	Moez (/moz/)	Maoz (/mɤz/)
10	Nesaer (/nɛs-er/)	Nesaer

Example of Conjectural Evolution

A popular example among linguists who attempt to show a direct path of evolution from Hindi is the constructed evolution of vári into heij:

Hindi: /vɑɹi/

Nouveau Hindi: /fɑɹi/

/v/>/f/ /_#

Proto-Capilhop: /pfiɹsi/

/f/>/pf/ /_#

/ɑ/>/i/ /frictive_

approximants+vowel>approximant+/s/+vowel /#_

Southern Capilhop: /pfisi/

approximant+fricative>fricative

Northeast Kupimic: /bviʃih/

/pf/>/bv/, /b/ /_#

/s/>/ʃ/ /V_V

V>V/h/ /#_

Old Temenuecha: /biʒih/

stop+fricative>stop /_#

/ʃ/>/ʒ/ unless /#_

Temenuecha: /piʒ/

/b/>/p/ /_#

loss of case determiners (/-ih/ in this case)

Faranit: /ʔiʒ/ <heij>

/p/>/pʰ/>/ʔ/ /_#

Language names in bold have been reconstructed from various sources with some supposition.

Another popular example is the similarity between the Quechuan kay and the Faranit kaej. Supporting the Hindi Hypothesis is the use of nasals to denote water or objects associated with them (ie mikanah, rainfall, mescinefh, coastal forest, etc.). Proponents of a lineage from Quechua often cite the highly agglutinative nature of Faranit. Nonetheless, evidence of Hindi ascendency is also shown in the use of familiar Hindi suffixes, such as -it, which often have similar meanings to the corresponding Hindi suffixes.

The current theory is that early versions of Faranit arose from a contact situation between speakers of languages descended from Quechua and Hindi. The primary peices of the vocabulary and grammar appear more Quechuan in origin, but there is still a significant number of words theoretically derived from Nouveau Hindi. Therefore it is believed that the Quechua speakers provided a slightly larger fraction of the population, but that Hindi speakers still comprised a significant minority that might have originated as an artisan or upper middle class.

External Links

[|original outline]