Iac Marscheir
Citizen of Talossa
yak marsh air
Posts: 782
Talossan Since: 12-3-2016
Baron Since: Qet Miestra tent zirada.
|
Post by Iac Marscheir on Nov 23, 2017 9:09:51 GMT -6
Regarding the infinitive ending, from time to time I've floated the idea that the pronunciation of r in the infinitive ending may actually be regular, and thus would not need to be marked in writing. Regarding vowels î and ë, I mounted a pretty vigorous defense of î back in 2007 and would be open to resurrecting it (subject to concerns about how to mark stress as mentioned previously), but there are some pretty strong feelings on both sides of that question. I'm less convinced that the abolition of ë was a mistake, because I'm not sure Ben had quite thought things through in how he used and described the various forms of e. ... A2007 did contemplate disambiguating monosyllabic homophones with stressmarks, as in some other Romance languages. Its guidance about how to do so was vague, however. Hool made some judgment calls regarding which words got stressmarks in l'Översteir, but I think a new Arestada (or Pienamaintsch) to clear things up may be in order. In l'Ö, "så" became "sa" while "sâ" (the old conditional marker) became "sà". The reflexive pronoun "se" stayed as-is while the possessive marker "së" became "sè". Pre-2007 disambiguation-via-stressmarking was retained on "a" (3rd person singular feminine subject pronoun) and "à". For the most part he retained stressmarks on the monosyllables that had them historically where they would be useful for disambiguation. I've thought about whether this disambiguation could be regularised based on considerations like prosodic stress, along the lines of monosílabos tónicos y átonos in Spanish, but that may not be feasible without departing too much from historical practice. Then, could a possible consensus/Reunision Arestada be written up: 1) restoring the spelling of the infinitive to -r from -rh; 2) restoring î in some form (maybe spelling it with Turkish dotless i, who knows); 3) disambiguating monosyllabic homophones with stressmarks? If all those could be done, I would consider the matter settled (although dunno what Tomás G. would think). What do the SIGN crew think? The SIGN "crew" has nothing to say. It abstains from these discussions and will accept whatever the collective result of these discussions is.
|
|
|
Post by Alèx Soleighlfred on Nov 23, 2017 9:13:25 GMT -6
|
|
Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial
Batetz las maes, perf. —— Freelance glheþineir (I only accept Worthless Internet Points™ as payment)
Posts: 448
Talossan Since: May 12, 2014
|
Post by Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on Nov 23, 2017 9:25:50 GMT -6
We already have a fricative infinitive. Exactly. Epic wants to keep it what way, it was a response to this: Regarding the infinitive ending, from time to time I've floated the idea that the pronunciation of r in the infinitive ending may actually be regular, and thus would not need to be marked in writing.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Nov 25, 2017 23:53:36 GMT -6
I'm very happy that Cresti has formally asked the CÚG list to get involved in this conversation. I hope all SIGN members will do likewise. We are closer than ever to consensus on Talossan orthography than at any time since 2007.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Dec 5, 2017 15:46:30 GMT -6
Given rampant apathy from other CÚG members and the official neutrality of SIGN, I would like to formally suggest to Sir C. M. Siervicül as Ladîntsch Naziunál that he and I put our heads together to draft the Reunision Arestadâ, ASAP.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Dec 8, 2017 19:08:12 GMT -6
Then, could a possible consensus/Reunision Arestada be written up: 1) restoring the spelling of the infinitive to -r from -rh; 2) restoring î in some form (maybe spelling it with Turkish dotless i, who knows); 3) disambiguating monosyllabic homophones with stressmarks? If all those could be done, I would consider the matter settled (although dunno what Tomás G. would think). What do the SIGN crew think? I am open to all of these, we would just need to work out the details. I've discussed this some with Hooligan off-Witt, and he’s receptive to these ideas. I’m trying to get him to find time to chime in here (and will also ping the rest of the CÚG again). It would be wonderful if we could get some kind of feedback from Sir Tomás as well. İ think Marcel’s and my position are clear on the alphabet: we want î, and we want å; as distinct and distinguishable graphemes and phonemes, but no matter which exact graphemes. I am… askance about “restoring” the pronunciation of infinitives to /r/. I quite like the fricative infinitive. As noted above, I support restoring î (though my preference would probably be to use ï for the phoneme), I am much less enthusiastic about restoring å. First, å is a marginal phoneme at best. Second, the ring diacritic fits poorly with the rest of the vowel scheme (whereas î can fit in quite nicely if it goes to ï). Third, there was a pretty broad consensus in favour of dropping å in 2005-2007, based on a proposal by Sir Tomás. If I recall correctly (and I imagine Dame Miestra can correct me if I misremember), discussion in the Republic focused on whether å should be replaced with a or o, whereas in the Kingdom a was the clear favourite. Regarding the infinitive ending, like Dame Miestra said, the proposal relates to the -r spelling rather than pronouncing it /r/. When I said the pronunciation of the infinitive ending may actually be regular (when spelled -ar), I had in mind Ben’s statements that the infinitive ending pronunciation was inspired by Portuguese, and that (more generally) word-final r “tends to devoice.” Plus, I believe that Ben was sometimes very precise in describing phonetic details of Talossan, but sometimes more approximate. Given the above, I think it plausible 1) that the core pronunciation of r is a voiced alveolar tap or flap, 2) that the general allophone of r in a word-final position is a voiceless alveolar tap or flap, 3) that in the environment -ar, the allophone tends to be some kind of voiceless alveolar fricative or approximant, similar to but not quite the same as /ʃ/, and 4) the /ʃ/-like pronunciation of -ar is especially common with infinitives. This last point of my theory is reinforced by some descriptions of Portuguese phonology I’ve read, which say that in certain dialects, certain pronunciations of r are more common in infinitives.
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Dec 9, 2017 3:13:24 GMT -6
I am much less enthusiastic about restoring å. First, å is a marginal phoneme at best. Second, the ring diacritic fits poorly with the rest of the vowel scheme (whereas î can fit in quite nicely if it goes to ï). Third, there was a pretty broad consensus in favour of dropping å in 2005-2007, based on a proposal by Sir Tomás. If I recall correctly (and I imagine Dame Miestra can correct me if I misremember), discussion in the Republic focused on whether å should be replaced with a or o, whereas in the Kingdom a was the clear favourite. Writing as a speaker of one of the three (?) languages that actually uses å, I have always found it a feature in Talossan that to me screamed "made up children's conlang". It's enormously jarring and an ugly contrast to the rest of the Talossan ortography.
|
|
Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial
Batetz las maes, perf. —— Freelance glheþineir (I only accept Worthless Internet Points™ as payment)
Posts: 448
Talossan Since: May 12, 2014
|
Post by Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on Dec 9, 2017 4:30:55 GMT -6
Finnish and Walloon (a Romance language of Belgium, no less!) use å. This has no relevance to this discussion, just saying.
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Dec 9, 2017 4:34:31 GMT -6
Finnish and Walloon (a Romance language of Belgium, no less!) use å. This has no relevance to this discussion, just saying. Finnish doesn't, except for in Swedish personal names. It's in the FI character set, but that is so they can write Swedish words. I had no idea that Walloon does, thank you!
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Dec 9, 2017 11:00:07 GMT -6
Finnish and Walloon (a Romance language of Belgium, no less!) use å. Apparently Emilian-Romagnol as well--another Romance language!
|
|