Talk:Náŋifi Fasúxa: Difference between revisions

From FrathWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
(Proposed revision of NF phonology)
Line 2: Line 2:


8/26: Given Greenberg's Linguistic Universal number 16, perhaps auxiliary verbs before the main verb transform the main verb into an subordinate adverb, thus honoring LU15 and LU16. Any thoughts?
8/26: Given Greenberg's Linguistic Universal number 16, perhaps auxiliary verbs before the main verb transform the main verb into an subordinate adverb, thus honoring LU15 and LU16. Any thoughts?
Hmm, that would preserve the basic structure. I like the idea.
--[[User:LinguarumMagister|LinguarumMagister]] 18:07, 13 August 2012 (PDT)
=Phonology Revision=
Here's a possible revision of NF phonology:
[m] > [+homorganic nasal]/_C
[n] > [l]/_C
[ŋ] > [ʔ]/#_C
[x] > [h]/#_C, C_ (except /x_/)
[+cons -vc] > [+vc]/_[+cons +vc]
[+cons -vc] > [+vc]/V_V
This last is a bit more complex -
'fa.su.xa > 'fɔ.zo.ɣa, fa.'su.xa > fɔ.'so.ɣa, fa.so.'xa > fɔ.zo.'xa
Vowel patterns:
Bivocalic:
a i > ɛ i
a u > ɔ u
i a > e a
i i > i i
i u > i u
u a > o a
u i > u i
u u > u u
Trivocalic:
a a a > a a a
a a i > a ɛ i
a a u > a ɔ u
a i a > ɛ e a
a i i > ɛ i i
a i u > ɛ i u
a u a > ɔ o a
a u i > ɔ u i
a u u > ɔ u u
i a a > e a a
i a i > e ɛ i
i a u > e ɔ u
i i a > i e a
i i i > i i i
i i u > i u u
u a a > o a a
u a i > o ɛ i
u a u > o ɔ u
u i a > u e a
u i i > u i i
u i u > u i u
u u a > u o a
u u i > u u i
u u u > u u u
Should I add  u i > ɯ i and i u > y u?
--[[User:LinguarumMagister|LinguarumMagister]] 18:07, 13 August 2012 (PDT)

Revision as of 17:07, 13 August 2012

I know that the syllable structure and length is a little engelang-ish, but the inherent instability is intentional. There will be a vulgar NF from which the daughter languages will be derived - but I have to finish the standard language first.

8/26: Given Greenberg's Linguistic Universal number 16, perhaps auxiliary verbs before the main verb transform the main verb into an subordinate adverb, thus honoring LU15 and LU16. Any thoughts?

Hmm, that would preserve the basic structure. I like the idea. --LinguarumMagister 18:07, 13 August 2012 (PDT)

Phonology Revision

Here's a possible revision of NF phonology: [m] > [+homorganic nasal]/_C [n] > [l]/_C [ŋ] > [ʔ]/#_C [x] > [h]/#_C, C_ (except /x_/) [+cons -vc] > [+vc]/_[+cons +vc] [+cons -vc] > [+vc]/V_V This last is a bit more complex - 'fa.su.xa > 'fɔ.zo.ɣa, fa.'su.xa > fɔ.'so.ɣa, fa.so.'xa > fɔ.zo.'xa Vowel patterns: Bivocalic: a i > ɛ i a u > ɔ u i a > e a i i > i i i u > i u u a > o a u i > u i u u > u u Trivocalic: a a a > a a a a a i > a ɛ i a a u > a ɔ u a i a > ɛ e a a i i > ɛ i i a i u > ɛ i u a u a > ɔ o a a u i > ɔ u i a u u > ɔ u u i a a > e a a i a i > e ɛ i i a u > e ɔ u i i a > i e a i i i > i i i i i u > i u u u a a > o a a u a i > o ɛ i u a u > o ɔ u u i a > u e a u i i > u i i u i u > u i u u u a > u o a u u i > u u i u u u > u u u Should I add u i > ɯ i and i u > y u? --LinguarumMagister 18:07, 13 August 2012 (PDT)