Transcription:

héra fqat, trés katzpat gydrus

karàston milo fuh hashtāf élki

hatrà, vyxat los juhtäk sil wäh

Translation:

long ago, a war occurred

many humans and elves died

until, our savior was born

IPA:

h = h

é = ɜ

r = r

a = a

f = v

q = q

t = t

é = eɪ

s = s

k = k

z = z

p = b

g = ʤ

y = ɪ

d = d

u = ʊ

à = æ

o = ɔ

n = n

m = m

i = i

l = l

ā = ɑ:

v = f

x = x

j = j

w = w 

so, most likely quitting reddit soon, what are some places to see and make neography and share and discuss conlangs and all that besides here?

all i can think of is discord servers, but those are hard to find and more often than not private. if anyone has some cool language focused discord servers im sure im not the only one who wouldnt mind an invite

​

Segehish version of the Lord's prayer with glosse and grammatical structure

Feel free to try and recite it and tell me how it goes!

I'm working on a conlang that will have both a paucal and a plural. Obviously the general rule will be paucal for small numbers plural for big but I'm interested in adding layers upon layers of complexity to the questions of when speakers choose paucal and when they choose plural.

If you've built a number system like that, can you tell us how it works? Does one number imply more collectivity than another? Are there formality things like the royal we? Do some words or some types of words never or always take a certain number despite how many of them there are?

If you inflect nouns for number as they are being counted (one squirrel, two squirrels, etc) at what number does the plural take over for the paucal?

One idea I had was to use the paucal as a kind of reverential singular for forces of nature. So when the wind or the sun does a verb, that verb takes the paucal even when the sun is obviously just one. Perhaps even the singular is used when you want to complain about it being too windy or too sunny! Or in reverse the paucal is used dismissively when talking about large groups - want to insult an enemy army, conjugate their verb in the paucal.

I want to make a personal language, mainly for storytelling and philosophy but it should be functional for most topics, and I don't know where to start, I know it's good to learn multiple languages before doing conlangs but I don't know which ones I should learn. My native tongue is English and I'm in the process of learning American Sign Language and I've attempted Gaelic, Japanese, Latin, and Spanish but I haven't gotten far on any. I'm interested in Yiddish too but I haven't tried it. I'd like to be able to use nouns from other languages for things that are defined to my satisfaction: simple things like stone or complex things like individual philosophies. I'd like something different sounding from English so it won't be a Latin root but I also don't want to choose a root language just because it sounds foreign. I'd like the pronouns to be based on the order someone appears in the conversation. Ie: Jackson and Hannah are out for a picnic. 1st has the basket and 2nt has the blanket. I'd also love to conjuncte based on certainty: this-is-a-fact is a different conjunction from this-is-an-opinion which is different from this-is-a-fiction, etc. And I'd love to use the circular gallifreyan or linear gallifreyan as a writing system. That just sounds fun. Any tips?

I've gotten extremely bored with making synthetic conlangs, so I've decided to make an analytic one. The problem is, however, that I have no idea what non-English analytic grammar could look like. Could you guys give me some particularly notable non-Indo-European analytic languages (other than like Sinitic languages) so I could get a rough idea of what kinds of things are possible? Thanks in advance!

I've had this problem multiple times now, but I just can't figure out why. My conlangs are mostly for my novels and it seeming natural usually isn't one of my priorities. I usually stick with very similar and basic phonemes (since I'm very picky about what sounds I like and I also have a bit of a lisp and I'd like to be able to pronounce all of the sounds). Even the grammar is more based on what I think looks/sounds nice and is easy enough for me to understand and use myself. But every time when I get to vocabulary and stuff I end up not liking how it looks.

For my current one I have a list of semantic word roots following a CV(V) syllable structure, and most words are formed by combining these to make compound words. It seemed foolproof to me at first but then I started introducing word classes, verb moods and noun cases and suddenly I hated every word. Sure, maybe I could just leave those out or find another way to add them but no matter what I tried, I hated it every single time. But I also don't want to leave them out completely except maybe the word classes.

Does anybody else experience this? And most importantly, does anyone have any ideas on how I could deal with this problem? Right now I'm just considering completely re-doing my current conlang for a 2nd time.

Let's say that to begin, I have a conlang called "Examplish". Examplish is basically a relex of English: No grammatical gender but it has gendered pronouns, base-10; you know where I'm going with this. However, I'd like to set Examplish apart from English a bit and change up some features. How much do I need to "add" to Examplish grammar until it's no longer a relex of English? Would it be enough to add just one? (Say, Sinic-style counters on numbers?) Or would I need to add more than that?

Today's Fiat Lingua is an introduction to how to use GramBank as a way of sharing a conlang. It's actually a collection of three resources, so I wanted to explain how they can work together.

First, GramBank is a new online resource that is somewhat similar to WALS, but even more useful. GramBank features around 200 mostly yes/no questions about morphosyntax (e.g. "Is there a distinction between inclusive and exclusive?"), and culls data from grammatical descriptions of more than 2,000 languages. By way of comparison, a similar entry in WALS has data from 200 languages. This is a great place to go if you're wondering what kind of variety there is for a particular area of morphosyntax, and also if you want to see how common a particular strategy is.

Second, the Fiat Lingua article itself has two parts. First, it's a description of how to use GramBank to document/share a conlang by Jessie Sams, and then there's an example Jessie created via a spreadsheet of GramBank features she created using one of her conlangs. That .pdf is here:

https://fiatlingua.org/2023/06/

If you go to the .pdf, you'll see in the latter description that there are links that don't work, because links don't export from Google spreadsheets to .pdf. In fact, the ideal way to share this information is via a link, and that's the last thing I wanted to share. UPDATE: The document-internal links on the .pdf of the spreadsheet at the end still don't work, but the document-external links now do work. If you downloaded the original version of the .pdf, please go ahead and download the new one, and the external links will work. (You can download it directly here.)

Jessie created a thorough spreadsheet on Google that lists every GramBank feature, along with a link to its description, and a dropdown menu for each feature, along with a column to provide a description of each feature. The sheet is read-only, so what you do is copy the sheet to your own Google Drive, and then you can fill it out for whatever conlang you're working on, and share that (ideally as a read-only spreadsheet) as a way of showcasing your conlang. There's a second tab that describes how to use the sheet. The ideal here is a sheet like this can be kind of a shortcut when someone asks, "What's your conlang like?" You can link the sheet and get a ton of information about the language in bullet-point form.

Again, the blank spreadsheet that you can copy and fill out can be found here.

An example of a filled out spreadsheet, featuring Jessie's conlang Zhwadi, can be found here.

Finally, as with Payne's Describing Morphosyntax, the GramBank list can be an aid to conlang construction, as well, as it serves as a series of probing questions about your conlang's grammar that, depending on where you're at in your creation process, you may not have answered yet—or which you may have actually answered without realizing it, but haven't formalized anywhere.

As always, if you have anything you'd like to share on Fiat Lingua, please feel free to contact me. It just needs to be a .pdf. Right now the queue goes all the way to next year, so there may be some lag before your submission is posted, but it'll get there.

Happy conlanging!

I would choose the fourth option, and I'm curious what everyone in here does.

View Poll

I'm trying to make my first conlang so I can have a realistic language for an alien race in a story I'm writing. The race is called the Enlo.

The Enlo are native to a planet where deserts are common and, as such, so are sandstorms. To deal with this environmental condition, the noses of the Enlo are much flatter compared to those of humans, and they have special facial muscles that give them the ability to close them without using their hands so they can weather sandstorms better.

I'm trying to figure out the sounds to use for the language, and I'm wondering how this adaptation would effect what sounds they can produce. Ideally I'd like them to be able to communicate in a sandstorm when their noses are closed, but when not in one and their noses are open I'd imagine that changes what sounds are available to them.

My current idea to resolve this issue is to simply not use nasal sounds in their language, since I doubt they'd develop words that couldn't be used in a sandstorm when communication is most vital. Their nostrils may simply be closed by default and are only opened to smell something or flared to express anger.

That said, I'm curious what more experienced conlang makers have to think about this. What do you think of my current solution? Would you handle this in a different way?

Since last I uploaded, I have made some progress on my conlang inspired by the Sumerian and Akkadian languages and the philosophy of absolute monarchy.

I have gotten rid of the '[lugl̩]' class, and will continue with three classes: 'Informal' (for people on one's own social standing), 'Formal' (for non-royals above one's social class), and 'Royal' (the king and his family). The pronoun chart I made before will be for the vocative case, so as to say 'O such-and-such'. So far, I am working on these from the perspective of a young commoner, which is why everything is going up in social class and why I have yet to develop a term for lower classes.

I have come up with some verb conjugations:

The verb [ku] meaning 'to eat':

https://preview.redd.it/2u6ssqiaqe3b1.png?width=648&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=f18c6b75021d9f2336e75634fa95b831f1a34cf8

And the verb [nax] meaning 'to drink':

https://preview.redd.it/8wv2x6aeqe3b1.png?width=642&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=94025866c9f4613c4d2b40a375def0f1d0005e57

These verbs are great examples of a potential difference in verb class that depends on phonology, where in verbs ending in a short high vowel like [i] or [u], the vowel is weakened to an approximant before the appropriate phi-agreement suffix is attached (except for 'I' and 'you').

I also forgot to include phonology last time (my apologies), so here it is below:

https://preview.redd.it/fsqt5j8vqe3b1.png?width=590&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=a8a6fcd6f6864cd14437e72be14fd5b1fc4f2174

I feel like I'm at a point so far that I can move onto morphology and some syntax, so now I'm working on noun case, verb tense, modality, and evidentiality! I'm so excited to share this one (my second conlang) with you guys!

I don't know what to do with how I want stress to be handled. I don't want stress to be phonetic, but I want stress to be there because without it, I will put the stress on random syllables like what English does and I want it to have some sort of rhythm like iambic pentameter. I was thinking about making a rule where depending on the amount of syllables there are in a sentence, that will determine the stress pattern. Do any natural languages do that?

Hi friends !

I wanted to thank you first for all the help on previous posts For those who don’t know I’m writing a mémoire on the impact of conlangs (specifically Artlangs) and their representation on a player’s immersion in video games

I finished the survey and wanted to post it here

https://forms.gle/T2S6ufq86ugFaxzg7

Thanks in advance if you take the time to fill it out it’s maybe 5 minutes tops and no worries if not

It’s my first survey so my tutor told me I could have one that’s a bit basic but let me know if you find any issues !

Sorry if it’s not allowed I’ll take it down

Have a great day !

I have an idea whereby a culture of people permanently removed from their homeland evolve a local/homeland gender class system from an earlier proximal/medial/distal distinction in their demonstratives but I’m not sure how plausible it is for a naturalistic language. I was hoping to get some feedback. I’ve added a rough timeline below.

Note: I use APPLE as a stand-in for a prototypical homeland noun and POTATO for local.

(1) Three-way proximity distinction in demonstratives

• sū “this”
• sē “that (near you)”
• māngi “that (far from us)”

all compatible with any NP

(2) Collapse of medial/distal distinction, replaced via metaphor with local/homeland distinction

• APPLE sū “this apple”
• POTATO sū “this potato”
• APPLE māngi “that apple”
• POTATO sē “that potato”

but not

• APPLE sē “that apple”
• POTATO māngi “that potato”

(3) Rebracketing for the local class (this is the step I’m most skeptical about)

• POTATO sū > POTATO+s ū
• POTATO sē > POTATO+s ē

but not

• APPLE sū > APPLE+s ū
• APPLE māngi > APPLE+m āngi

This step is inspired by the English rebracketing example a napron > an apron

(4) Reanalysis of many s-final homeland class nouns as local class (perhaps the switch is determined by how weak the semantic correlation to the homeland is, eg. maybe apples have since been brought over from the homeland but pears were not). So if the word for “apple” is mōs, this might look like

• mōs sū > mōs ū
• mōs māngi > mōs ē

Are there any “producer tags” or any features you put in all of your languages because you like them so much?

I put the sound /kʷ/ in each of languages just because I like it so much.

(A producer tag is a sound bite that music producers put in the songs they produce to show who’s responsible for producing the song.)

This could relate more to the culture attached to you conlang but whats your conlang’s equivalent of "once upon a time" ?

Example being in Korean “Long ago, when tigers smoked long pipes”. Most languages have a similar beginning to “once there was…” so what is your version of once upon a time?

I’ve never seen anyone ask this so I thought I’d ask that.

How do you say "Impostor" and "Among Us" in your conlang? And how the abbreviated words "amogus" and "sus" will sound?

I don't know if this thread was already created but I want to know what word you created for the 2020 (Ending)-2021-2022 (Beginning) meme.

Kenma (translates to "things known") is a work-in-progress conlang that I'm making for intellectual debate/discussion. Unlike something that's designed to have no ambiguity or a formal logical structure (like Ithkuil or Lojban), the goal here is to increase quality, convenience, and, most importantly, rigor, of political, philosophical, etc. conversations (particularly spoken, but also written). This ranges from small features, like having a single word that means "I understand what you're saying/going to say, and you can move onto the next point" to massively important features, like the evidentiality system.

In Kenma, all verbs (and adjectives function as verbs) conjugate for evidentiality using a custom system the distinguishes between things known a priori, things verified empirically, things known personally, and by the source of the knowledge: speaker, listener, shared, reported, hearsay. Taken together, this allows one not only to specify how one knows something to be true, but also how and whether the listener and third parties can verify it. And, and this is salient (and, to my admittedly limited knowledge, not a feature in any other conlang), using certain evidentialities invites certain replies. The most powerful of these is "path", which translates to "back that up", and it's applicable whenever someone uses a priori or direct, shared, or reported empirical. In Kenma, using any of these evidentialities also means that the speaker has the appropriate evidence on hand and is inviting the listener to demand it by saying "path". I don't think I need to explain how powerful this is likely to be, both insofar as it'll push people towards more rigor and insofar as it makes very clear how well-supported a claim is, and effortless to get the relevant evidence.

If you're interested in being part of the effort to learn Kenma, or just want to hear more, I encourage you to join this discord I set up for it: https://discord.gg/fDrs8ZwdsP

In my time zone, it's actually early. Wow.

Anyway, it's finally the mid-year which means it's time for our annual Junexember challenge. The basic gist is to add 100 entries to your conlang's lexicon in one month.

Here are the official rules and prompts

On the final day of June, I'll post here again so you can share your work!

Seeeeee y'all. o/

The question is highly subjective, but I’m curious what is the best strategy for a language to be learned by people outside conlang community.

Seems like there are three ways:

• Pick one source language. You get (kinda) predictable dictionary for free, but it is not the most international way
• Pick one language family. You get very simple language sore some, but it get isolated within the language family
• Pick few words from all major languages. Your dictionary is highly international, but there is not much reasons for a person to learn a language, because few words will look familiar, and others completely unknown
• Imagine every single word. Your dictionary is highly fare for everyone, but it is difficult to learn every single word

What are your thoughts?

Transliteration is the process of converting a word or text from one writing system to another, while maintaining the original pronunciation and sound of the word or text. It involves mapping the characters of one writing system to the corresponding characters of another writing system, based on a set of rules or conventions. Transliteration is commonly used to represent words or names from one language in another language, and it is often used in dictionaries, academic texts, and other language-related materials.

Leņebals has cobizswzglindnyprsyftstympstfo (what a ruthless crime) - 30 letters

Co- What Bizswzglindny- Ruthless Prsyftstympstfo- Crime

Question words (who what etc.) and adjectives can be optionally suffixed so you could write it as co bizswzglindny prsyftstympstfo

I was working on my conlang and I wanted to expand on my lexicon using derivational morphology. I've made a few derivational suffixes (such as location, person, and a diminative/augmentative pair) and I was planning on some more. However, I started to wonder, what really is the difference between a prefix and a suffix.

​

By that I mean semantically and not syntactically. Like English has many affixes such as un-, in-, -ly, -ish and many more. There is a variety of both suffixes and prefixes. My question is what is the reason behind a certain affix being a suffix and another being a prefix. Like in the word redo, why couldn't the prefix re- be a suffix such as dore?

​

What is the reason for this historically? Is it because of the part of speech, semantics, or something else?