Talk:Náŋifi Fasúxa: Difference between revisions
(Revised NF Allophony) |
(Possible Verb Reform - Please Comment) |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
=Phonology Revision= | =Phonology Revision= | ||
=Allophones= | ==Allophones== | ||
If Na'ŋifi Fasu'xa had not already possessed an orthography, the phonetic transcription would be quite different. A dearth of phonemes indicates a wealth of allophones. | If Na'ŋifi Fasu'xa had not already possessed an orthography, the phonetic transcription would be quite different. A dearth of phonemes indicates a wealth of allophones. | ||
/n/ [n] becomes [l] before a following consonant | /n/ [n] becomes [l] before a following consonant | ||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
Should I add u i > ɯ i and i u > y u to this mix? | Should I add u i > ɯ i and i u > y u to this mix? | ||
--[[User:LinguarumMagister|LinguarumMagister]] 19:46, 23 August 2012 (PDT) | --[[User:LinguarumMagister|LinguarumMagister]] 19:46, 23 August 2012 (PDT) | ||
=Verb Reform= | |||
Given the limits of NF syllabicity, I figure that I should make it a more efficient engine. So here's the proposed new scheme, eliminating verb-noun agreement (the syllable in caps are stressed)" | |||
Regular: | |||
CVcvcv - Active | |||
CVvccv - Passive | |||
CVcvvc - Reflexive | |||
CVvcvc - Recriprocal | |||
Causative: | |||
cvCVcv - Causative | |||
cvVCcv - Intensive | |||
cvCVvc - ? | |||
cvVCcv - ? | |||
Any thoughts? | |||
--[[User:LinguarumMagister|LinguarumMagister]] 21:30, 20 October 2012 (PDT) |
Revision as of 20:30, 20 October 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) What about this: NF is verb-initial, but nothing so far suggests that the verbal slot is limited to one verb. The auxiliary verb is going to agree in gender and number with the main verb anyway. --LinguarumMagister 20:02, 23 August 2012 (PDT)
Phonology Revision
Allophones
If Na'ŋifi Fasu'xa had not already possessed an orthography, the phonetic transcription would be quite different. A dearth of phonemes indicates a wealth of allophones. /n/ [n] becomes [l] before a following consonant /antufi/ [ɔl.tu.'fi'] /m/ [m] becomes a homorganic nasal [m], [n], or [ŋ] before a following consonant. /ta'amxi/ ['tɛ':ŋ.hi] /ŋ/ becomes [ʔ] in word-initial position, but remains /ŋ/ elsewhere. /ŋa'sinu/ ['ʔɛ'.zi.nu] /na'ŋifi/ ['nɛ'.ŋi.vi] /x/ [x] becones [h] before or after any consonant except /x/ /xiupxa/ ['hjo'p.ha] Voiceless consonants (i.e., everything except the nasals) becomes voiced following a voiced consonant (i.e., a nasal). /a'tmaxi/ ['a'd.mɛ.γi] Voiceless consonants become voiced between vowels, if they follow the accented syllable. /a'tmaxi/ ['a'd.mɛ.γi] /atmaxi'/ [ad.mɛ.'xi'] /na'ŋifi fasu'xa/ ['nɛ'.ŋi.vi fɔ.'so'.γa]
Vowel Patterns
Although Na'ŋifi Fasu'xa appears to have only three vowels, the interactions between them have created unique bivocalic and trivocalic patterns. These are laid out below - the first set of vowel indicates the orthography, the second the pronunciation. 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 to this mix? --LinguarumMagister 19:46, 23 August 2012 (PDT)
Verb Reform
Given the limits of NF syllabicity, I figure that I should make it a more efficient engine. So here's the proposed new scheme, eliminating verb-noun agreement (the syllable in caps are stressed)" Regular: CVcvcv - Active CVvccv - Passive CVcvvc - Reflexive CVvcvc - Recriprocal Causative: cvCVcv - Causative cvVCcv - Intensive cvCVvc - ? cvVCcv - ? Any thoughts? --LinguarumMagister 21:30, 20 October 2012 (PDT)