Search found 453 matches
- Sat May 11, 2024 4:37 am
- Forum: Conlangery
- Topic: Brassica SCA [v0.2.0]
- Replies: 128
- Views: 80393
Re: Brassica SCA [v0.2.0]
Development has slowed down a lot, but finally got around to fixing this! In the next release, you’ll be able to write extra ŋ kʷ pʷ ɨ ' θ at the beginning of the file, which will tell Brassica to recognise those multigraphs as ‘extra’ characters throughout all subsequent category redefinitions. Ay...
- Fri May 10, 2024 7:31 pm
- Forum: Conlangery
- Topic: Brassica SCA [v0.2.0]
- Replies: 128
- Views: 80393
Re: Brassica SCA [v0.2.0]
I always end up having to make a category "X" which is just all the left over shit like ŋ kʷ pʷ ɨ ˈ θ and never gets used for anything. Development has slowed down a lot, but finally got around to fixing this! In the next release, you’ll be able to write extra ŋ kʷ pʷ ɨ ' θ at the beginni...
- Fri May 10, 2024 2:45 am
- Forum: Conlangery
- Topic: Challenge: American English as a separate language
- Replies: 30
- Views: 579
Re: Challenge: American English as a separate language
[ˈkʰʊː.ae̯.ˈɛːv.n̩ː.ˌɑ̃ː.ʁ̃ˤɯːp̚ˈpʰɑː.mʁ̩ˤː] [ˈtjɛːv.ˈɜ̃ːj.ˌae̯ˈdiː.əː.ˈwʌə̯m.ˈsʲpi.kɘ̃.ˌɪːʁˤ] Kind of on a tangent, but do you have any idea what kind of quantitative vowel length difference you have? When I try and read out your examples they always seem pretty reasonable, except the vowel length...
- Mon May 06, 2024 7:39 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: Syntax random
- Replies: 195
- Views: 114171
Re: Syntax random
I'm trying to reformulate this with a verb that doesn't require auxiliary negation: 1′. "We only aren't anaesthetists" → we're everything but anaesthetists 2~3′. "We aren't only anaesthetists" → we're anaesthetists and other things too 4′. ?"It's only anaesthetists which we ...
- Mon May 06, 2024 7:18 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: Syntax random
- Replies: 195
- Views: 114171
Re: Syntax random
Here's my two cents: 1. "We only didn’t see the Louvre" → we didn't see the Louvre, but we did all the other things expected of tourists going to France 2. "We didn’t only see the Louvre" → we saw the Louvre, and did some other things 3. "We didn’t see only the Louvre" ...
- Sun May 05, 2024 6:36 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Random Thread
- Replies: 3731
- Views: 451085
Re: Random Thread
A totally unrelated random musing: Have humans made more transistors, or more things which aren't transistors? I think transistors win out by a large margin. This took longer to find than I expected, but I think I have a candidate: viral particles in the Covid vaccines. First, let's look at the tra...
- Sun May 05, 2024 2:54 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Random Thread
- Replies: 3731
- Views: 451085
Re: Random Thread
A totally unrelated random musing:
Have humans made more transistors, or more things which aren't transistors? I think transistors win out by a large margin.
Have humans made more transistors, or more things which aren't transistors? I think transistors win out by a large margin.
- Wed May 01, 2024 4:45 am
- Forum: Conlangery
- Topic: Romanization Challenge Thread v2.0
- Replies: 979
- Views: 477814
Re: Romanization Challenge Thread v2.0
Seenku You're welcome 🙏 Initials: /p b t d ts dz c ɟ k g kp gb/ <p b t d ti di ki gi k g ku gu> /m n ɲ ŋ ŋm/ <m r ni n nu> /f s/ <su s> /l (j) w/ <l j w> Major syllable nuclei: /a ɛ ɔ e o (ɪ) ʊ i u/ <a c q e o x f j~i v~u> and so on for all <j v> /aː ɛː ɔː eː oː iː uː/ <a' c' q' e' o' i' v'> /ã ɛ̃ ...
- Mon Apr 29, 2024 6:30 am
- Forum: Almea
- Topic: "Experiencer"
- Replies: 40
- Views: 4405
- Wed Apr 24, 2024 4:48 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: English questions
- Replies: 1396
- Views: 446954
Re: English questions
Bilabially trilled coronal affricates (advibrates?) are found fairly frequently in Sino-Tibetan too; some language (can't remember which, Nort would know) has synchronic /ⁿdə/ → [ⁿdʙv̩]. Wikipedia says Namuyi has a full set of bilabially trilled affricates /pʙ bʙ tʙ dʙ/ but it's unsourced (well it'...
- Tue Apr 23, 2024 6:31 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: English questions
- Replies: 1396
- Views: 446954
Re: English questions
I have heard it suggested that the Pirahã suddenly starting to use /tʙ̥/ around Everett was literally just a joke. Like they were bored and wanted to fuck with him so they started sticking raspberries in random words. Isn’t it also seen in Wariʼ, at least? Yeah. And Oro Win. EDIT: looking it up, ap...
- Tue Apr 23, 2024 4:43 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 933
Re: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
/s/ is always weird phonotactically. Some say it's a vowel.
- Tue Apr 23, 2024 4:42 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: English questions
- Replies: 1396
- Views: 446954
Re: English questions
I have heard it suggested that the Pirahã suddenly starting to use /tʙ̥/ around Everett was literally just a joke. Like they were bored and wanted to fuck with him so they started sticking raspberries in random words.
- Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:35 pm
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
- Replies: 43
- Views: 1043
Re: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
This is precisely the situation I’ve been describing! The question is, why did that small percent difference even exist in the first place? (As I recall, people have actually calculated what the difference should have been to produce the amount of matter we see today. Wikipedia quotes it as being ‘...
- Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:29 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 933
Re: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
Actually English phonotactics are almost identical to those of Latin, you just have to add some more sC onsets, a few more RC codas and then a indiscriminate post-coda /s~z θ t~d/. Suck it, Catholics.
- Mon Apr 22, 2024 6:25 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
- Replies: 43
- Views: 1043
Re: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
This is precisely the situation I’ve been describing! The question is, why did that small percent difference even exist in the first place? (As I recall, people have actually calculated what the difference should have been to produce the amount of matter we see today. Wikipedia quotes it as being ‘...
- Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:33 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
- Replies: 43
- Views: 1043
Re: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
Yes, if there was an equal amount of antimatter as matter, it would all have been annihilated, and the universe would consist of photons alone. (Which, if I must state the obvious, it does not.) In that case it makes sense that there's more of one kind than the other, since otherwise we wouldn't ex...
- Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:30 am
- Forum: Languages
- Topic: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
- Replies: 22
- Views: 933
Re: What are the phonotactics rules for Classical Latin?
It’s surprisingly hard to find an answer for this, but the maximal structure would appear to be something like (s)(C)(r)V(r)(C)(s). For more detail see, for instance, Latin syllable structure in typological perspective (Lehman n.d.). I think (s)(C)(l,r)V(l,r,N)(C)(s) is better, with the caveat that...
- Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:10 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
- Replies: 43
- Views: 1043
Re: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
Yes... and then we'd call it "matter." The sign is arbitrary. Sorry, I meant "mutually annihilated with all the matter". Yes, if there was an equal amount of antimatter as matter, it would all have been annihilated, and the universe would consist of photons alone. (Which, if I m...
- Sun Apr 21, 2024 12:04 am
- Forum: Ephemera
- Topic: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
- Replies: 43
- Views: 1043
Re: Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time?
That’s not what the problem is. Essentially: we predict that the Big Bang should have produced an equal amount of matter and antimatter, in the past. The question is: given that initial state, why do we see more matter than antimatter today? If there was more antimatter, wouldn't it of blown up all...