Does my grammar make sense?

If you're new to these arts, this is the place to ask "stupid" questions and get directions!
Willowdove
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 3
Joined: 27 Mar 2017 00:48

Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Willowdove »

So I'm pretty new to this whole conlang business, and I've been trying to teach myself, but I've gotten to a point where I really could use some expert opinion. I have a working draft at this link: http://conlang.wikia.com/wiki/Mahali. It functions pretty well, but I'm not entirely sure that it's naturalistic. Particularly my verb structure. I guess I'd describe it as a agreeing to five arbitrary noun genders that in turn correspond to the each of the five vowels in my phonology? It's not a structure I've seen reflected elsewhere, and that makes me kind of nervous.

I'm not particularly attached to any of my grammar rules, and my goal IS to make something natural, so if there is anything that seems odd, please give me suggestions for improvement! Or if there are any areas that need to be fleshed out more, point them out to me! I really want to get this right.
User avatar
k1234567890y
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2400
Joined: 04 Jan 2014 04:47
Contact:

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by k1234567890y »

Having taken a quick view, I think they look ok (: don't worry (:
I prefer to not be referred to with masculine pronouns and nouns such as “he/him/his”.
masako
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1813
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 16:42

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by masako »

You don't have /w/ in your phoneme inventory but you use <w> in your vocabulary.
g

o

n

e
GrandPiano
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2080
Joined: 11 Jan 2015 23:22
Location: USA

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by GrandPiano »

/w/ is in their phoneme inventory, but it's below the table.

Just so you know, /w/ is usually classified as a velar approximant for convenience on phoneme tables.
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4094
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by qwed117 »

GrandPiano wrote:/w/ is in their phoneme inventory, but it's below the table.

Just so you know, /w/ is usually classified as a velar approximant for convenience on phoneme tables.
Either velar or labial. I've honestly seen velar used more, even though a labial classification is more accurate.
Spoiler:
My minicity is [http://zyphrazia.myminicity.com/xml]Zyphrazia and [http://novland.myminicity.com/xml]Novland.

Minicity has fallen :(
The SqwedgePad
User avatar
MrKrov
banned
Posts: 1929
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 02:47
Location: /ai/ > /a:/
Contact:

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by MrKrov »

Define more accurate.
Willowdove
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 3
Joined: 27 Mar 2017 00:48

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Willowdove »

Thanks everyone. I do have /w/ down as a phoneme in my personal notes but it must have gotten lost in the transfer [:D]
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2088
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Frislander »

MrKrov wrote:Define more accurate.
More accurate in the sense that /w/ is more labial than it is velar articulation-wise.
User avatar
Adarain
greek
greek
Posts: 511
Joined: 03 Jul 2015 15:36
Location: Switzerland, usually

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Adarain »

Frislander wrote:
MrKrov wrote:Define more accurate.
More accurate in the sense that /w/ is more labial than it is velar articulation-wise.
I mean it's the approximant equivalent to [k͡p]. You could call it a labialized velar approximant [ɰʷ] or a velarized labial approximant [β̞ˠ]. Whether you classify the phoneme as anything in particular only matters if it takes part in alterations that are restricted to a certain PoA.
At kveldi skal dag lęyfa,
Konu es bręnnd es,
Mæki es ręyndr es,
Męy es gefin es,
Ís es yfir kømr,
Ǫl es drukkit es.
User avatar
MrKrov
banned
Posts: 1929
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 02:47
Location: /ai/ > /a:/
Contact:

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by MrKrov »

[tick] There we go.
GrandPiano
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2080
Joined: 11 Jan 2015 23:22
Location: USA

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by GrandPiano »

Adarain wrote:
Frislander wrote:
MrKrov wrote:Define more accurate.
More accurate in the sense that /w/ is more labial than it is velar articulation-wise.
I mean it's the approximant equivalent to [k͡p]. You could call it a labialized velar approximant [ɰʷ] or a velarized labial approximant [β̞ˠ]. Whether you classify the phoneme as anything in particular only matters if it takes part in alterations that are restricted to a certain PoA.
One point worth noting is that [w] in most languages is pronounced with lip rounding, whereas all consonants described as purely labial with no secondary articulation to my knowledge do not have lip rounding. A [p] with lip rounding would probably be transcribed [pʷ] rather than just be regarded as another way of saying [p].
Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2102
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Iyionaku »

I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.
Willowdove
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 3
Joined: 27 Mar 2017 00:48

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Willowdove »

Iyionaku wrote:I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Oh dear. Well, I'm not terribly attached to the name. I'll come up with something else
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4094
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by qwed117 »

Willowdove wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Oh dear. Well, I'm not terribly attached to the name. I'll come up with something else
Don't worry, there's plenty of languages that go by the same name. Take Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese. Of course they all have their own subname...
Spoiler:
My minicity is [http://zyphrazia.myminicity.com/xml]Zyphrazia and [http://novland.myminicity.com/xml]Novland.

Minicity has fallen :(
The SqwedgePad
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2088
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Frislander »

GrandPiano wrote:
Adarain wrote:
Frislander wrote:
MrKrov wrote:Define more accurate.
More accurate in the sense that /w/ is more labial than it is velar articulation-wise.
I mean it's the approximant equivalent to [k͡p]. You could call it a labialized velar approximant [ɰʷ] or a velarized labial approximant [β̞ˠ]. Whether you classify the phoneme as anything in particular only matters if it takes part in alterations that are restricted to a certain PoA.
One point worth noting is that [w] in most languages is pronounced with lip rounding, whereas all consonants described as purely labial with no secondary articulation to my knowledge do not have lip rounding. A [p] with lip rounding would probably be transcribed [pʷ] rather than just be regarded as another way of saying [p].
I'm pretty sure that languages which contrast /k͡p/ and /kʷ/ *riffles around* OK, they contrast in Igbo and a few other languages of the area.
Nachtuil
greek
greek
Posts: 595
Joined: 21 Jul 2016 00:16

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Nachtuil »

Good old Igbo!
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4094
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by qwed117 »

Frislander wrote:
GrandPiano wrote:
Adarain wrote:
Frislander wrote:
MrKrov wrote:Define more accurate.
More accurate in the sense that /w/ is more labial than it is velar articulation-wise.
I mean it's the approximant equivalent to [k͡p]. You could call it a labialized velar approximant [ɰʷ] or a velarized labial approximant [β̞ˠ]. Whether you classify the phoneme as anything in particular only matters if it takes part in alterations that are restricted to a certain PoA.
One point worth noting is that [w] in most languages is pronounced with lip rounding, whereas all consonants described as purely labial with no secondary articulation to my knowledge do not have lip rounding. A [p] with lip rounding would probably be transcribed [pʷ] rather than just be regarded as another way of saying [p].
I'm pretty sure that languages which contrast /k͡p/ and /kʷ/ *riffles around* OK, they contrast in Igbo and a few other languages of the area.
that being said, I think the point here is that the subarticulation of w is often predicated on lip rounding. It's more common that say in a default generic inventory, that w is replaced with /β/ or /ʋ/ compared to /ɣ/ or /ɰ/

Based on PHOIBLE

w occurs in 1812 languages, of a set of 2155

What we are trying to find is the phonemes that best bridge the gap between 1812 and 2155 (roughly 340 languages)

Velar phones
ɰ occurs in 34 languages out of 2155
ɣ occurs in 295 languages out of 2155

329 languages

β occurs in 281 languages out of 2155*
ʋ occurs in 34 languages out of 2155

315 languages

*including β̞

This is essentially inconclusive on the issue of which is the primary articulation. PHOIBLE isn't the best source, it lacks the ability to map the phonemes over each other (for example w∪β - w∩β would be a better comparison point. Same with w∪ɣ - w∩ɣ)
Spoiler:
My minicity is [http://zyphrazia.myminicity.com/xml]Zyphrazia and [http://novland.myminicity.com/xml]Novland.

Minicity has fallen :(
The SqwedgePad
GrandPiano
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2080
Joined: 11 Jan 2015 23:22
Location: USA

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by GrandPiano »

qwed117 wrote:
Willowdove wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Oh dear. Well, I'm not terribly attached to the name. I'll come up with something else
Don't worry, there's plenty of languages that go by the same name. Take Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese. Of course they all have their own subname...
Honestly, I don't think I've anyone just say "Chinese" and mean Cantonese or Hokkien. They may be referred to as "Chinese dialects" (which, as I'm sure you know, is inaccurate), but if usually if someone just says "Chinese", they're either referring specifically to Mandarin or to all Sinitic languages regarded as dialects of a single language.
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5091
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Creyeditor »

GrandPiano wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
Willowdove wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Oh dear. Well, I'm not terribly attached to the name. I'll come up with something else
Don't worry, there's plenty of languages that go by the same name. Take Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese. Of course they all have their own subname...
Honestly, I don't think I've anyone just say "Chinese" and mean Cantonese or Hokkien. They may be referred to as "Chinese dialects" (which, as I'm sure you know, is inaccurate), but if usually if someone just says "Chinese", they're either referring specifically to Mandarin or to all Sinitic languages regarded as dialects of a single language.
Well, in certain contexts there might be one salient "Chinese" language, that is not Mandarin. If you are in certain countries in Soth East Asia for example.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2088
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Does my grammar make sense?

Post by Frislander »

Creyeditor wrote:
GrandPiano wrote:
qwed117 wrote:
Willowdove wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:I just would like to mention that there IS actually a language called Mahali. It's spoken in the Indian state of West Bengalia and is a Munda language. ;)
Oh dear. Well, I'm not terribly attached to the name. I'll come up with something else
Don't worry, there's plenty of languages that go by the same name. Take Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese, vs Chinese. Of course they all have their own subname...
Honestly, I don't think I've anyone just say "Chinese" and mean Cantonese or Hokkien. They may be referred to as "Chinese dialects" (which, as I'm sure you know, is inaccurate), but if usually if someone just says "Chinese", they're either referring specifically to Mandarin or to all Sinitic languages regarded as dialects of a single language.
Well, in certain contexts there might be one salient "Chinese" language, that is not Mandarin. If you are in certain countries in Soth East Asia for example.
Indeed: in that context it's normally Hokkien which is being referred to, or possibly Cantonese or Hakka.
Post Reply