In Italian the word for "tomato" is "pomodoro" which litterally means "golden apple" (pomo d'oro) since the first tomatoes we had were yellow. Initially the plural was formed by declining only the first element, the "apple", which gave the form "pomidoro". Then, some kind of hypercorrection happened and we got the form "pomidori"(from which comes the Russian word ”помидоры”) which blurred the compounding. Lastly, the plural of this weird red fruit became "pomodori". Fun fact: the word "tomato" comes from the nahuatl word "tomatl".
That's why in southern dialects of Serbo-Croatian different places have different vowels! In Dubrovnik it was borrowed as "pomadora" (< pomodoro, I guess), but in Metković, I believe, it's "pomidora" (< pomidoro)
If there is that carry-possesion and know-possession with human/relation nouns, then wouldnt it be nice if carry-possesion implies acompanying? Like "Yesterday on the street I saw my ex, and I'm afraid that a friend he carries saw me too" (The ex was sitting with his friends and one of the group saw you) vs "Yesterday I saw my ex and a bit later I also met a friend he knows" (the ex was doing his business, and the friend his own independently). A random thought
i like the idea that some nouns shorten up and become derivational affixes. It actually reminds me of Lushootseed, where there's a class of "lexical affixes" that are used in lieu of true compounding. They don't look like the actual nouns for those things because they were codified so long ago. my favorite example is that the word for "birch tree" is the word for in-laws and a suffix meaning "tree/bush" because the full name of the birch tree is "in-law of the cherry tree" (apparently it's related to some cultural myth? I haven't found it yet though)
Kinda random, but when I think adjectives, the first thing I wonder about is comparatives and superlatives. Another random thought: when you were wondering why some adjectives can have "un" and others can't, I was reminded of the "opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose" hidden rule in English adjective ordering - and so I wondered if "un" is limited in where it can insert into that order. But now I have to check every adjective that 'un' works with and see where it fits with that order to see if my idea holds water, and I'll probably not get around to that. (edit: now I'm wondering if other languages have a similar rule, and what it would be like to not have such a rule at all, or to have a different rule, and why it might go one way or the other)
Always fun to listen to these while I am working on my own conlang. It reminds me of all the things I still need to do (I've been putting adjectives off for so long)
so i went looking on WALS for languages with both case affixes and the same word for "with" and "and", just in case you wanted some languages to look for info about. here's the list, organized loosely by macroarea S. America- Goajiro, Piro, Jaqaru N. America- Chemehuevi, Kalispel, Shuswap, West Greenlandic Siberia- Yakutat, Even, Nenets South/Southeast Asia- Burmese, Limbu Africa- Zulu, Mooré, Middle Atlas Tamazight given what you've done with the language so far, i think the Siberian languages are the most likely to be helpful, but figured i'd give the whole quick list anyway
Two languages I've been studying, Japanese and Mandarin, both have interesting ways of indicating an 'and' relation. In Japanese for example you can 'and' two nouns by using the と 'to' particle, as in 犬と猫 'inu to neko' ('dogs and cats'), but you cannot use this to combine clauses. To do that, they use converbs, with the 'te-form' being the most common: 歩いて帰る 'arui-te kaeru' (walk-CONV return), meaning 'going home on foot' or more literally 'walking and go home'. This 'to' is also used how we'd use 'with': 君と一緒に 'kimi-to issho-ni' (you-with together-LOC) meaning 'together with you'. Interestingly, you actually can add this 'to' particle to verbs, but then it indicates not an 'and-ness' but rather a causal relation: ドアを開けると、家に入れるんだ 'doa-o akeru to, ie ni hair-eru n da' (door-ACC to.open COND, home LOC enter-POTENTIAL NOMINALISER COP) meaning 'if you open the door, you'll be able to enter the house'. In Mandarin, which you mentioned to also know some things about so you'll probably already know this, the word 和 'hé' is used to combine similar nouns or nominal phrases only, as in 狗和猫 'gou3 hé mao1' 'dogs and cats', but not clauses like *我吃饭和想回家 'wo3 chi1 fàn hé xiang3 huí jia1' 'I'm eating and want to go home'. In this case you can use 也 'ye3', which means 'also' instead of hé, or you can just put the clauses next to one another: 我吃饭，我想回家 'wo3 chi1 fàn, wo3 xiang3 huí jia1' 'I'm eating, (and) I want to go home'. This 'hé' also means 'with', as in 我和你打电话 'wo3 hé ni3 da3 dian4hua4' meaning 'I'm calling you', or literally 'I with you hit telephone'
I think the ideas you had for adjective classes are great and even the ones that seem mutually exclusive could make it into the language if you want to imagine them as old proto-forms that were either lost outside of a few instances or maybe changed over time based on sound changes. My favorite example of that is one you kind of mentioned, “-ly.” In Middle English and in modern German there’s “lich” which looks more like “like” in a way that might’ve been seen as more grammatically correct at one point. I also think one similar to “-ish” might be interesting, meaning only like something to a degree. When making this comment I looked it up and found out that word is a suffix that dates back to PIE and is where the Slavic “-ski” ending for names comes from. Maybe a proto-form of an adjective class that looks particularly nice could be a common part of surnames. Hope you had a great holiday!
14:20 This is actually *exactly* what happened with English -like, grammaticalised from Proto-Germanic *līką, "body; shape, appearance", so it's definitely a sensible strategy.
Never was a major fan of conlang but i will admit its a bit underappreciated so carefully crafted and technical. Its as interesting if not more than speculative evolution!
20:42 I'm happy to hear this, as it makes it sound like my conlangs absurd number of basic conjunctions isn't actually that unrealistic. An interesting point my conlang taught me is that, in English, we often use a zero-conjunction between adjectives or adverbs applying to the same thing. (E.g., we say "the little red ball" not "the little and red ball", though on the other hand we say "the black and white ball", whereas "the black white ball" sounds like some kind of oxymoron or like it requires one of those colors to be metaphorical.)
9:44 "It's like they can only co-occur on the same word if they can each find there own separate meaning to convey" I think that happens a lot in English, actually, although sometimes the non-standard affix is used as an archaic form or something if it has no other meaning, or can be used with the meaning that normally requires the other affix even if it does usually have a different meaning nowadays.
Tasty and tasteful are delived from two different meanings of "taste" so, on some level, it could just be that, in this case, they're being treated as different words, grammatically.
On the Adverbial/Similitive fusion. I think the difference is more down to the root word being derived from. -ly in English can form adjectives and adverbs yes, but (as far as I'm aware), the adjectives are formed from nouns and the adverbs are formed from adjectives (compare strongly and friendly).
I know that you probably can’t stand the idea of starting a new speculative bio project right now, but as a viewer I would love to see the ultimate culmination of creating a geologic history following the artifexian videos, then creating a biological history to follow it, and then creating civilizations and languages following the evolution of sentient life and maybe even a divination into intra- nation politics
My English isn’t very good so I don’t actually understand and I tried the auto translate to Arabic but I didn’t understand Idk what are you doing but I would love to learn your language
Doesn't re-using the negative auxiliary imply that the children *don't* live in the city? Niilar külqöös sadháás qöröt aaryë baraadhiir assë, dërë diimün aarqa baraadhaarra lühöörrö küülqö imrës aaryë vööröt "children old woman reaching they're-not strong were, but still they-know strong friends-to old one-city they're-not lived" It seems like the final auxiliary should be aaras instead of aaryë And just because i like making my own sentences: ba nimirrë nay naas, ba küülqö aykëdhëk nidháán nikűűn
Denens seįyilq est leyxe Afro-Asiatek seįyilqere höstild, yi wağəm dest den dveteïsait istifaten? Your language sounds like afro asiatic languages and why do you use double vowel?
i'm more interested in the thinking. i want to learn what questions i should be asking when making a language, what my thought process should be and how i can arrive at each decision and this video format is really helpful there
@@zandman3737this is how I feel, too - if he did his thinking off screen we wouldn't learn anything about the process, and only the result. I'm probably in a minority here, but I'm not particularly interested in the result - but I'm learning a ton about language from the process.
I feel like this would make this much less of a case-study and more like an extended showcase--this series is really meant to be an in-depth look at the process of creating a conlang and I find it an invaluable resource for my own clonging endeavors as I see what works and doesn't work for experienced linguists.
In Italian the word for "tomato" is "pomodoro" which litterally means "golden apple" (pomo d'oro) since the first tomatoes we had were yellow. Initially the plural was formed by declining only the first element, the "apple", which gave the form "pomidoro". Then, some kind of hypercorrection happened and we got the form "pomidori"(from which comes the Russian word ”помидоры”) which blurred the compounding. Lastly, the plural of this weird red fruit became "pomodori".
Fun fact: the word "tomato" comes from the nahuatl word "tomatl".
In Sicilian, I think it got pluralized as "pomidora" from "pomidoru", and then it became a mass noun
That's why in southern dialects of Serbo-Croatian different places have different vowels! In Dubrovnik it was borrowed as "pomadora" (< pomodoro, I guess), but in Metković, I believe, it's "pomidora" (< pomidoro)
If there is that carry-possesion and know-possession with human/relation nouns, then wouldnt it be nice if carry-possesion implies acompanying? Like "Yesterday on the street I saw my ex, and I'm afraid that a friend he carries saw me too" (The ex was sitting with his friends and one of the group saw you) vs "Yesterday I saw my ex and a bit later I also met a friend he knows" (the ex was doing his business, and the friend his own independently). A random thought
i like the idea that some nouns shorten up and become derivational affixes. It actually reminds me of Lushootseed, where there's a class of "lexical affixes" that are used in lieu of true compounding. They don't look like the actual nouns for those things because they were codified so long ago.
my favorite example is that the word for "birch tree" is the word for in-laws and a suffix meaning "tree/bush" because the full name of the birch tree is "in-law of the cherry tree" (apparently it's related to some cultural myth? I haven't found it yet though)
Kinda random, but when I think adjectives, the first thing I wonder about is comparatives and superlatives.
Another random thought: when you were wondering why some adjectives can have "un" and others can't, I was reminded of the "opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose" hidden rule in English adjective ordering - and so I wondered if "un" is limited in where it can insert into that order. But now I have to check every adjective that 'un' works with and see where it fits with that order to see if my idea holds water, and I'll probably not get around to that.
(edit: now I'm wondering if other languages have a similar rule, and what it would be like to not have such a rule at all, or to have a different rule, and why it might go one way or the other)
Always fun to listen to these while I am working on my own conlang. It reminds me of all the things I still need to do (I've been putting adjectives off for so long)
so i went looking on WALS for languages with both case affixes and the same word for "with" and "and", just in case you wanted some languages to look for info about. here's the list, organized loosely by macroarea
S. America- Goajiro, Piro, Jaqaru
N. America- Chemehuevi, Kalispel, Shuswap, West Greenlandic
Siberia- Yakutat, Even, Nenets
South/Southeast Asia- Burmese, Limbu
Africa- Zulu, Mooré, Middle Atlas Tamazight
given what you've done with the language so far, i think the Siberian languages are the most likely to be helpful, but figured i'd give the whole quick list anyway
Two languages I've been studying, Japanese and Mandarin, both have interesting ways of indicating an 'and' relation. In Japanese for example you can 'and' two nouns by using the と 'to' particle, as in 犬と猫 'inu to neko' ('dogs and cats'), but you cannot use this to combine clauses. To do that, they use converbs, with the 'te-form' being the most common: 歩いて帰る 'arui-te kaeru' (walk-CONV return), meaning 'going home on foot' or more literally 'walking and go home'. This 'to' is also used how we'd use 'with': 君と一緒に 'kimi-to issho-ni' (you-with together-LOC) meaning 'together with you'. Interestingly, you actually can add this 'to' particle to verbs, but then it indicates not an 'and-ness' but rather a causal relation: ドアを開けると、家に入れるんだ 'doa-o akeru to, ie ni hair-eru n da' (door-ACC to.open COND, home LOC enter-POTENTIAL NOMINALISER COP) meaning 'if you open the door, you'll be able to enter the house'.
In Mandarin, which you mentioned to also know some things about so you'll probably already know this, the word 和 'hé' is used to combine similar nouns or nominal phrases only, as in 狗和猫 'gou3 hé mao1' 'dogs and cats', but not clauses like *我吃饭和想回家 'wo3 chi1 fàn hé xiang3 huí jia1' 'I'm eating and want to go home'. In this case you can use 也 'ye3', which means 'also' instead of hé, or you can just put the clauses next to one another: 我吃饭，我想回家 'wo3 chi1 fàn, wo3 xiang3 huí jia1' 'I'm eating, (and) I want to go home'. This 'hé' also means 'with', as in 我和你打电话 'wo3 hé ni3 da3 dian4hua4' meaning 'I'm calling you', or literally 'I with you hit telephone'
I think the ideas you had for adjective classes are great and even the ones that seem mutually exclusive could make it into the language if you want to imagine them as old proto-forms that were either lost outside of a few instances or maybe changed over time based on sound changes. My favorite example of that is one you kind of mentioned, “-ly.” In Middle English and in modern German there’s “lich” which looks more like “like” in a way that might’ve been seen as more grammatically correct at one point. I also think one similar to “-ish” might be interesting, meaning only like something to a degree. When making this comment I looked it up and found out that word is a suffix that dates back to PIE and is where the Slavic “-ski” ending for names comes from. Maybe a proto-form of an adjective class that looks particularly nice could be a common part of surnames. Hope you had a great holiday!
14:20 This is actually *exactly* what happened with English -like, grammaticalised from Proto-Germanic *līką, "body; shape, appearance", so it's definitely a sensible strategy.
Never was a major fan of conlang but i will admit its a bit underappreciated so carefully crafted and technical.
Its as interesting if not more than speculative evolution!
I miss visualisation in conlang so I am like "a... wath" after I wath it but I must agree that it stimulates my brain in a special way
20:42 I'm happy to hear this, as it makes it sound like my conlangs absurd number of basic conjunctions isn't actually that unrealistic. An interesting point my conlang taught me is that, in English, we often use a zero-conjunction between adjectives or adverbs applying to the same thing. (E.g., we say "the little red ball" not "the little and red ball", though on the other hand we say "the black and white ball", whereas "the black white ball" sounds like some kind of oxymoron or like it requires one of those colors to be metaphorical.)
I sadly lost track a good time ago. Would you do an update video that explains how far you have come?
right when i was back in a linguistics groove :) i love this series
9:44 "It's like they can only co-occur on the same word if they can each find there own separate meaning to convey"
I think that happens a lot in English, actually, although sometimes the non-standard affix is used as an archaic form or something if it has no other meaning, or can be used with the meaning that normally requires the other affix even if it does usually have a different meaning nowadays.
Tasty and tasteful are delived from two different meanings of "taste" so, on some level, it could just be that, in this case, they're being treated as different words, grammatically.
ooh, just what i was looking for!
are you gonna make a showcase video on Taqva miir when you're done with it
Tasty and tasteful have a parallel in hurty and hurtful, I can't think of any more though
On the Adverbial/Similitive fusion. I think the difference is more down to the root word being derived from. -ly in English can form adjectives and adverbs yes, but (as far as I'm aware), the adjectives are formed from nouns and the adverbs are formed from adjectives (compare strongly and friendly).
26:11 NAND conjunction? Hype 🎉
Hell yea, let's goooooooo!!!
You can use quinapalus QAT to find more -y/-ful combos, like Mastery and Masterful etc.
Mastery is a noun though
I know that you probably can’t stand the idea of starting a new speculative bio project right now, but as a viewer I would love to see the ultimate culmination of creating a geologic history following the artifexian videos, then creating a biological history to follow it, and then creating civilizations and languages following the evolution of sentient life and maybe even a divination into intra- nation politics
Do you think you could do a video covering making non-vocal languages? Maybe sign languages or languages based on color?
is it me or is the audio quality here kinda crappy (unlike in previous vids) could it be youtube worsening its compression?
youtube decided not to give me the notification for this 🙃
My English isn’t very good so I don’t actually understand and I tried the auto translate to Arabic but I didn’t understand
Idk what are you doing but I would love to learn your language
Doesn't re-using the negative auxiliary imply that the children *don't* live in the city?
Niilar külqöös sadháás qöröt aaryë baraadhiir assë, dërë diimün aarqa baraadhaarra lühöörrö küülqö imrës aaryë vööröt
"children old woman reaching they're-not strong were, but still they-know strong friends-to old one-city they're-not lived"
It seems like the final auxiliary should be aaras instead of aaryë
And just because i like making my own sentences:
ba nimirrë nay naas, ba küülqö aykëdhëk nidháán nikűűn
Denens seįyilq est leyxe Afro-Asiatek seįyilqere höstild, yi wağəm dest den dveteïsait istifaten?
Your language sounds like afro asiatic languages and why do you use double vowel?
@Ayxan_Eyvaz Did you watch the video? I'm typing out Taqva-Miir, with biblaridion's own spelling system. Why are you talking to me in turkish?
@@doorhanger9317 Its my language not turkish
@@Ayxan_Eyvaz well I don't understand it, I'm only using Taqva-Miir because I'm commenting on a video about Taqva-Miir
E
EEEEE
E
EEEEE
E
EEEEE
I found them… THE ROYAL KÖSEMEN FLASH BANGER INCARNATE
@@idle_speculation 🤯
Why don't you do the thinking off-screen and the construction part of conlanging on-screen?
Besides that, love what you have been doing
i'm more interested in the thinking. i want to learn what questions i should be asking when making a language, what my thought process should be and how i can arrive at each decision and this video format is really helpful there
@@zandman3737this is how I feel, too - if he did his thinking off screen we wouldn't learn anything about the process, and only the result. I'm probably in a minority here, but I'm not particularly interested in the result - but I'm learning a ton about language from the process.
I feel like this would make this much less of a case-study and more like an extended showcase--this series is really meant to be an in-depth look at the process of creating a conlang and I find it an invaluable resource for my own clonging endeavors as I see what works and doesn't work for experienced linguists.