Talk:Conlang Conworld/Lingua Franca

Name
I was thinking Qorbna /qoɾbnä/. What do you guys think?

Maxseptillion77 (talk) 02:35, January 27, 2015 (UTC)Maxseptillion77

I would drop the ɾ If I could understand what I just said my head would explode. (talk) 02:52, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

Arabic ftw. Let's make it more similar to IE. -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | crimes)

Ok ok, let me say something: Arabic and Semitic langauges are awesome! But Ok, I have no problem with IE languages. Maybe /koʃtʃo/ if Slavic, /əntʰug/ if Armenian, /t’ʔaɾk’/ if Kartvelian, /tʃarxa/ if Persian, or /kʷarno/ if Italic, /kæθäɻʂə/ if priori. If you guys have any idea just tell me (us).

Maxseptillion77 (talk) 21:52, January 27, 2015 (UTC)Maxseptillion77

Just a fyi, Arabic is Semitic :P -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | crimes)

Base
We could base it Kartvelian-Armenian languages, Slavic languages, Persian (Indo-Iranian) languages, or (a conlang cliché) Italic or Romance languages. Thank you the Kaufman for this idea. Or just have it be priori.

Maxseptillion77 (talk) 21:52, January 27, 2015 (UTC)Maxseptillian77

On a purely aesthetic basis, I would suggest a Kartvelian-Armenian basis, though with Semitic verbal templates just for fun. However, we are somewhat confined to Romance languages due to the fact that only this type of language currently exist in the Conlang Conworld. Of course, this isn't an absolute limit, but I just thought it might be a good idea to point it out.

What about illogical   fallacies?  00:04, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

That Meuser2 for being more fun! I'll vote on that.

Maxseptillion77 (talk) 02:25, January 28, 2015 (UTC)Maxseptillion77

I'd make it a priori in vocab and with a rather conservative or just random polysynthetic (yeah I like polysynthetic) grammar but common Old Italic phonology or so. It'd be nice in my opinion.

Also, I don't like most of the Meuser's propositions due to the fact that, despite looking promising, are a bit hard to create. And, Meuser, what's Slavic in the conworld? D: -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | crimes)

Is there nothing Slavic? I apologise; I presumed there was.

Although I do like the ideas mentioned above by myself (obviously), I do agree that they would be hard to implement. I would still like them though.

As for the Kaufman's suggestion, I will say firstly that I know nothing about Old Italic phonology, but have no objections to it. As for the grammar, could I please have clarification on the suggestion of 'conservative' (I presume you mean conservative PIE, but that's probably wrong). I do like the idea of a polysynthetic language but would question whether it would be suitable for a lingua franca used internationally. Evidence suggests that languages do tend to simplify as they become more widespread in their user base. I would predict, then, that a polysynthetic language would most likely become agglutinative within few generations (or thereabouts). I can't give any direct evidence that this is so, however; no polysynthetic language has ever been adopted for such a purpose as far as I know.

What about illogical    fallacies?  22:47, January 28, 2015 (UTC)