User talk:Detectivekenny

Hi, welcome to Conlang! Thanks for your edit to the Quai'op page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Moli.wikia (Talk) 01:08, 7 September 2009

Numbers
Hi,

Excuse me because I asking you for my demand (numbers from your conlang(s)) in this page. I think to send my message on your e-mail. But nowhere I didn't see information about your e-mail. First introduce: My name is Janko. I'm collecting numbers from various systems in different languages. You can found information about my self and my work on:

http://janko.gorenc.googlepages.com/home

http://janko.gorenc.googlepages.com/collectionnumbers

Please you tell me if you'll have numbers in Unu Tinqu in future.

Could you please send me numbers from 1 to 10 (as in English: 1 –one, 2 – two, 3 – three,…) in Unu Tinqu, or from your other conlang(s) on this page or my e-mail address: "j_gorenc@yahoo.com"?

Please you delete my text with your page when you'll have numbers.

Thank you for your help!

I wish you a lot of success at your work!

JANKO GORENC

GO AWAY!
Get off my project RIGHT NOW. Your vandalism is unnaceptable.  Tur bo  Golf  16:22, March 21, 2010 (UTC

I must agree, please do not use or change thigns on conlang pages without owner permission if it is for anything bt making appearence better

EmperorZelos 16:52, March 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes. Leubantia is private.  Tur bo  Golf  17:16, March 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * That and it horrificly rude, and please dont use that form of signature, yellow against white is aweful reading and it is poorly constructed, use the standard


 * EmperorZelos 19:29, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

whaaaaa? First of all, I am done with project leubansky. Secondly, you basically asked me to change it. Third, I am supposed to be gone until june, and fourth, you are being an extremely rude person. good day. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:33, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Good sir, this is a cross-wiki feud that is constantly elevating. Tharnton DID agree to such changes, here, however I don't know the extent of the scope of that agreement. Woogers (lol what hax) 03:02, March 22, 2010 (UTC) <-- LOL I don't have a userpage. Need to fix that in my signature.

There was no per se agreement as Tharnton kept changing his conditions. However, I was allowed to do the minimum to keep Leubantia in the NRW which includes changing the language entirely. Before, it was exactly the same us Anglesh ixcapt ell thu vuwils wir chungid ünd déücrätécs wîr üddîd. A BALTIC COUNTRY WITH DANISH ANCESTRY! In a nearly real world. I am only a linguistic autodidact, but that is outrageous. So I fixed up the language. Ocassionally he will agree but other times he will burst and make rude comments. I wasn't meaning any harm. I wouldn't edit any page not mine without permission. Maybe I regret wasting my time on Leubantia… —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 03:33, March 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Leave it be now, though it does seem that Mr Turbo got quite a history on another wiki


 * EmperorZelos 08:28, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

I must agree with Detectivekenny, the old Leubantian. . . SUCKED. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:20, March 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, BUt let Turbo take the shame on everything of its poorness (as mentioned, helping making it look nicer, more organized etc is acceptable naturally) rather than someone add stuff on their own


 * EmperorZelos 21:26, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

But we don't want the shame of it's poorness in GTO/NRW.—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:56, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

OK. The old Leubantian was absolutely awesome. Leubansky looks like a 1 year olds project. Leubantia is private. And the old Leubantian was not poor. Yeesh.  Tur bo  Golf  17:26, March 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * How was it awesome? EmperorZelos 19:11, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

I just don't understand. Everyone thinks your flag sucks because of the spray paint and misalignment, but you say Spart's beautiful flag is ugly while yours is beautiful. The same thinks is happening with Leubantian. How can you possible think the old Leubantian is awesome? Languages ARE NOT codes of each other, especially with Leubantian and English. Vowels have diacritics for a reason. The new Leubansky is well thought out and it MAKES SENSE and is actually realistic. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:17, March 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I must agree here and another important aspect of conlanging to make it "awesome" is when it is original, unique yet realistic and usable. Codes of another language is not a conlang and as "conlang" they are horrific EmperorZelos 20:27, March 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * TimeMaster, how dumb are you? The total opposite of what you said is obviously extremley more true.  Tur bo  Golf  15:56, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Adding purposeless diacritics to vowels and slightly changing words into a code of English makes it not a language. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:55, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yes it does. LOLWUT  Tur bo  Golf  21:15, March 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Turbo before I start going on name calling, TM is correct, that does NOT make it a language. If it is its a BAD language, a HORRIBLE language. EmperorZelos 21:23, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Hello
I thought after checking things an apology might be in place as i initially took side with Turbo which i saw sometime ago was completely wrong but forgot mentioning.

How is your conlangs going? {-EmperorZelos}


 * Oh thanks. Can I have your opinion on Gurcaj? Some of my friends find it confusing, but since you know a lot about Conlangs and stuff it would be nice to have your opinion. Of course it's not a complete project, and it's constantly being streamlined. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:06, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I wouldnt say i know a lot but i konw suffient =) I´ll check it out.


 * few pointers


 * 1) "an absolutive-ergative language, clearly distiguishing subjects and objects of a verb" Absolutative-Ergative means the SUBJECT of intransitive and transitive verbs is divided up while subject of intransitive and object of transitive is marked the same (usually unmarked)
 * 2) and what do you mean affixes being prepositions? That would seem rather problematic to me, but that is more of a personal taste
 * 3) and the site seems messy because the increased size of the font almost appear to be random
 * 4) As an IAL I would personally say it has little to no hope catching as it appears to be, what i call it, soulless
 * Hope those helps The Emperor Zelos 21:20, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

No idea what happened with the ergative stuff. I guess I made it active-stative at one point and confused myself.

Affixes prepositions, like upstairs or downtown.

lol

Soulless? More Specific? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:24, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * If you want it to be the object being marked it is Nominative-Accusative though


 * Yeah, if you wish to keep a language simple and regular that will bite back


 * :P


 * As you are aiming for perfect regularity in an IAL or close ot it the language will seem inhuman, not by humans, not something poeple want to touch. I honestly dont know but more often than not when a language is too perfect people frown upon it as it doesnt feel nearly as used. While english is a complete ****ing mess it have the natural feeling people like (and curse) {-EmperorZelos}

Subject of transitive is marked. But it's not exactly perfectly regular. I created this to try to avoid this because I have a soulless language sitting in my notebook that is absolutely perfect. The fun here is in the grammar and pronunciation, both pretty unusual. I'm still trying to work everything out. The grammar is not set, but yeah… I don't know of any non-soulless IALs honestly. But what may be soulless to one group of people is soulful to another. If I only spoke English, I would consider Esperanto soulful. However… I am rambling. Let me know whether the grammar concepts are too confusing and I will take care of the soulfulness myself. And please sign your replies lol so I don't have to do it for you. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:38, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Esperanto is in many ways soulless because it also lack culture. :P I try signing them, But im human damn it so sometimes i forget! The Emperor Zelos 21:58, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Does it at least sound decent? It's supposed to sound like quâc quâc like Viet Namese for efficiency.

Progme Tijucoc: Phater moc ngethjen, Sursangktoy nom noc, Fenoy wangarg noc, Uratoyn forme noc, Soy pagsurme thjenngeme, Phartoynme ofhonme moc Noy ituktho mou tentemes, Oy irypoyr mou aks.

Also I have a problem. Verbs are in the form xxxxx-xx in Gurcaj where - is the last vowel, symbolyzing the tense as in Arabic. Nouns are xxxxxxx with almost no rules. Is there a way to prevent abiguity without having words like "and" because those are so redundant stupid. Or should I just let the ambiguities be the "soul"? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 22:23, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

I would say using the vowel like that to mark tense is not the most effient but it makes it realistic and more soulful and quite interesting. but I dont think all nouns/verbs shall be that long, it seems unreasonble. and what do you mean with "abiguity" in this context? The Emperor Zelos 22:50, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Are you familiar with Esperanto? Mi estas, mi estos, mi estis. It's all in the vowel, except all verbs end in -Vs. How is it not efficient, I'm wondering. Pretend I made a word tso meaning eat. And then I made a noun tse meaning son. And don't forget our favorite type of fly. Tse tse tsetse. The son will eat the tsetse fly. Happens a lot in Chinese. But it's still understandable because of the tones. In Gurcaj I want to keep tones away. Tone are too hard for most people who aren't native to any given tonal language. There is only a small intonation shift down. But anyway, that's abiguity. Or else you could take John, while Paul had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher (look up on Wikipedia). Or buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 23:03, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

dear lord the cursed tones, I find them very itneresting though a real creation of the devil to learn D:. But You are correct to a certain degree. Though tones are a no no for IALs, they are just too hard The Emperor Zelos 23:25, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Of course English would have to get over raising their tone when asking questions or when talking in general? I think non-tonal languages have the hardest tones ever. Have you noticed that Chinese accent is usually with bad intonation? So I think I will just leave it. I think Lojban is really the most soulless ever. It was created by a computer. But about the way the text flows. Does it seem consistent? I find that when people make languages, eighty percent of the time it either looks mostly like Welsh or more like Japanese/Hawaiian if you know what I mean. But that is because most of those languages have rings to them. What do you think about the "ring" of Gurcaj?

And finally, do you think the aligner-system is too difficult? My friends find it confusing, but I think it's no harder than normal cases. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 23:35, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Butting in
Some suggestions on the claim that is improves on esperanto.


 * gender neutral - Makes a language soulless. And it's not required in esperanto. Chinese and Quechua are gender-neutral It's not required in English either, for that matter. If it's not what I think it is, I don't know what you are talking about. In Esperanto, the string hundoj kaj hundinoj is understood to mean "male dogs and female dogs," but "virhundoj kaj hundoj" has no such meaning and can only be interpreted as "male dogs and dogs"; some may find this offensive
 * composed of fewer, more international sounds - K. It doesn't really do anything though. Try making a Chinese-speaker count to ten in Esperanto. I will admit the "ng-" sound can be difficult for westerners though Lol, you just need sound samples. Converting a fricative into a plosive is easy, adding new places of articulation is hard. I find the all sounds in IPA (except flaps, epiglottals, and pharyngeals) easy. yeah, me too. The uvular trill took me a while though :) so ng- shouldn't be too hard. Esperanto is probably harder for Chinese than ng- is for English-speakers
 * uses only nineteen letters instead of Esperanto's thirty-two - See above. See above. See above. yeah
 * in the VSO word order, making the verb the most important part - I though SVO makes the most sense, because the subject is verbing the object. But Esperanto is far more flexible on this, you just use -h to mark an object. That's your opinion. You didn't give a reason why SVO is better, you just defined it. Ask a Filipino or Irish man person and they will agree with me. I know, but ask a German or English person and they won't. In Esperanto, you can choose. There are some maneuvers which allow you to choose, and those can be taught easily, as in Esperanto
 * an absolutive-ergative language, clearly distiguishing subjects and objects of a verb. - that would be a tripartite language. Also, nominative-accusative languages makes the most sense because the argument in intransitive and subject in transitive are both verbing. No, it's absolutive-ergative, trust me, but the intro may not be fully updated on the site. No, ergative-absolutive is when the OBJECT in transitive and the sole argument in intransitive are the same. It is the same in nominative-accusative, except it's when the SUBJECT in transitive not the object. I know. But there has to be some way to distinguish subject and object on intransitive verbs, especially in VSO, and that is using simple cases. It was worded a little badly, but lol. It is Absolutive-Ergative, though.
 * a language that combines verbs with adjectives for simplicity - I think this would make it less simple. Really? Maybe for you… Like in Chinese, one can just say "I happy" because happy is a verb, instead of having to worry about the "am" Gerunds. Gerunds. Gerunds. Also, there is differences between what nouns are DOING and what they ARE. Here, the line is very thin in English, believe it or not. First of all, a gerund is a noun, so leave that out. Yes there is a difference. Those are the two classes of verbjectives: adjectives and verbs, but they are trated mostly the same. But realize that the line is very thin in English. For example, "to be born" is considered a verb in English. However, isn't born an adjective? Aren't we all born?
 * more internationally neutral, not just European, including roots from Chinese and other major languages like Hindi - Great. Thanks. You're welcome.
 * a language that uses very few roots to get many words instead of having many words - Esperanto has both so if your native lang is analytic, you can use words, and if your native lang is synthetic you can use combinations of morphemes. However, Gurcaj takes it to the next level to really reduce to vocabulary. For example, the word paserino has nothing to do with the word birdo, but it would in Gurcaj. Interesting. Most languages don't go to that extent though, so speakers might find the huge amount of morphemes intimidating, especially people with analytic native langs. lol Chinese is maybe the easiest language to learn Gurcaj from. I have a system called tsung that reduces the number of morphemes for concepts like animals and birds without having to go into binomial nomenclature
 * a completely regular, but flexible language - Elaborate. lol it is what it says lol every language can be like that. nah, this is just to confirm it's not a bunch of irregular verbs and declensions. But if you realize that Quechua is the only perfectly regular language in the world, you will see that this is not an easy task, especially when dealing with copulae

—Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:52, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

Also, conjunctions are important. Unless two nouns together MEANS 'and', it doesn't make sense to me. And I think you should make just one form of 'or' because in both situations, 'or' means the same thing. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:06, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

See the above green text.

No offense, but the reason things don't make sense to you is because you are thinking inside the Anglobox. You seem to lean pretty far towards finding English logical without proof. But I have proof why English is illogical. It is that people who speak English like tend to use ummmmmm lots and lots of ummms, errrs, likes, and circumlocutions, yeah. But people who speak other languages don't. Even in Chinese where people can hammer out loads of information with tiny syllable-length words because English disrupts the flow of information and therefore is illogical.


 * um, er, and like are thought holders that aren't part of the language. If you need a second to recall or think about something, people say it because other people say it. I'm not sure how they originated.


 * But no one says it in any language because everyone can think clearly in their language. No matter who speaks English, everyone says umm unless they are thinking carefully to avoid saying that —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:05, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

The thing about Esperanto is it was meant to be logical for Europeans because at the time, it was practical for Europeans because China was under the Taipings and was sort of out of the picture. However, now, we have to find a new substitute that will take into account the billions of Chinese, Indians, and Arabs all over the world, because it is not fair to them to force an essentially eurocentric language on to them.


 * Although I agree with adding loanwords from asian and african langs, China uses symbols instead of an alphabet. International sounds are good but usually asians have little trouble, except with the "h" sound, which is like trying to learn an epiglottal consonant for me.


 * I am going by pronunciation, not by written. Everyone in Chinese knows pinyin, but words like Chinese have "h" in words that go "ha" in pinyin i.e. Shanghai, but otherwise it usually sounds like "kh." Gurcaj is mostly Chinese friendly, but in Esperanto, b, d, g, v, ĝ, ĵ, r, z would all be difficult to Chinese because of the aspiration/voicing differences. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:05, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, btw, two nouns together means "and." But you notice the difference between the two sentences, "Does he want this or that?" and "He wants this or that"? The meanings are entirely different, and there are two different words in several languages, like Chinese, and you don't see anyone in China complaining. Also, intonation isn't used as much as in English, because intonation would make it too hard for people who speak tonal languages like Chinese.


 * There are two different meanings of 'and' as well, one for lists, another is a conjunction. I see the usages faintly disconnected but have the same general meanings. One of the meanings means 'and' in a slightly different way lol.


 * Yeah. Chinese and Quechua have words for "and" for lists, but neither has a conjunction "and" for phrases, although Chinese does have more specific conjunctions specifying whether the two actions happen at the same time or at different times. Gurcaj has neither, but I may add in one for nouns if necessary. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:05, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for my desultory criticism or your comments, but thanks. I originally intended the language to be international (despite being slightly Tagalog/Chinese leaning), but seeing your comments, from an English speaker, I may have to revise. However, if I do, I might hear similar complaints from China. We'll have to see.


 * It was supposed to be a response to the claim it 'fixes' esperanto. {-Timemaster}


 * Okay. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:05, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

However, of all things, I haven't heard any comments on a) the pronunciation/general appearance of the language or b) the aligner system. Do you have any problem with wither of those, as the latter is possibly quite counterintuitive, at least at first. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:39, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

I haven't read on the aligner system yet. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:23, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Have you yet? <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 22:51, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Q
I am trying to get to know Quai'op a little better (the "translation challenge" is a great tool!) and I am somewhat confused. When describing your language, the first thing you list in the "grammar" section is some 20+ different forms ("cases"?) for nouns. Are those marked in any way? I could not figure out how they are marked. Same for tenses etc. Adagio burner 05:37, May 8, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest. The are not really cases, but it so happens that some of the nouns have inherent "prepositions." Just like in English, you say "Today, I will go to movies." The today has an inherent temporal case, but you don't say, "On today, I will go to the movies". In Quai'op, this phenomenon is much more extensive for similar common words, but most words need case markers. Similar with tenses. Only really common words can have full inflection, and then there are some with only some inflections (past, present, future), and then others must have the appropriate tense marker. In both cases, there are no steadfast rules, so it's mostly rote. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 16:35, May 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Excuse my intrustion, but "Today, I will go to movies" the "today" is the topic and is a way to speak, frensh is a topic prone language and so is japanese where one would simply say like "The resturant, its down there" and so on The Emperor Zelos 19:13, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! So do I understand it correctly that some common words have the "prepositions" built into them while others require separate case/tense markers? That makes sense. Do you have a list of markers though? I could not find it.

Zelos, yes, "today" can be treated as a topic, or as a adverbial modifier ("I will go to the movies today"). That depends on the language. I guess Quai'op is not topic-centric :) Adagio burner 19:40, May 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Naturally, but in english when it is fronted in that fashion it is topic. The Emperor Zelos 20:00, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess. My bad.  But are you distinguishing topic from focus?  <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 00:19, May 10, 2010 (UTC)