Rarut asTaniq

Rarut asTaniq (/ˈɾaɾut asˈtaneq/, "tongue which is Taniq") is intended to be an exercise in what one could call the "Tolkien" method of conlanging; that is to say, to begin with a proto-language and apply a series of regular sound changes in order to produce a developed language with a specific sound. Rarut asTaniq, then, is to be the precursor of several daughter languages.

Consonants
The language's consonants included some typologically uncommon ones, such as the voiced uvular plosive /ɢ/ and nasalised approximants. Most of these would later develop into more common sounds, often with differing outcomes depending on the position. It should be noted that the "flap" series is an inaccurate term; in truth, the only flap present is the alveolar /ɾ/, the other consonants of the series being pronounced as weak approximants, with a flapped realisation only occurring intervocalically (and only ever for the bilabial series). It is hypothesised that the alveolar flap developed itself from an approximant, most likely */ð/.

Vowels
Only the vowels /a/, /i/, and /u/ existed as phonemes in this language. However, [e] and [o] existed as allophones of /i/ and /u/, respectively, when adjacent to uvular consonants. There were no length distinctions in vowel sounds; a sequence of two identical vowels was always pronounced as two separate syllables. However, stressed vowels might be pronounced with some (non-contrasting) length; hence a word such as "taniq", meaning "speaks", would have pronounced as [ˈtaˑneq].ˈ

Phonotactics
The vast majority of roots appeared solely in the form CVCVC, with no restraints as to which consonants and vowels could appear. Consonant clusters were not permitted within roots, but could arise from affixation of grammatical or derivational markers, as well as in compound words. This meant that a maximum of two consonants could occur adjacent to one another. Pronominal and particle roots tended to be shorter, taking the form (C)V(C).

Stress is dynamic and predictable, with the first syllable of the first disyllabic root taking primary stress, and any following roots taking secondary stress on their first syllable. Thus the word "rarut", meaning "tongue" would be pronounced /ˈɾaɾut/, while the compound "rarutpuqim", meaning literally "tongue-skill" (i.e. poetry) would be pronounced /ˈɾaɾutˌpuqim/, and it's inflected form "añrarutpuqim" ("for poetry") would be pronounced /aŋˈɾaɾutˌpuqim/ (with no stress on the initial syllable as the prefixed root is not disyllabic).

Nouns
All roots are split between those which are intrinsically active, and those which are passive. Nouns are conjugated differently depending on what type of root they are based on; for example, the root *bikuñ, meaning "child", is considered active and declines as follows: It is immediately notable that a passive case, to correspond to the active case seen on the table, is not present. This because that case, as well as other "corresponding" cases, are seen to belong to the "passive" class of roots. For example, a word like *kamañ, meaning "name", will be declined in a very different way. Here we can see that the plural marker changes for passive nouns. It is perhaps better to see these markers, rather than as "active" and "passive plurals", as markers denoting "many different X" and "a group of X", respectively. Indeed, some nouns, such as *arag ("forest"), appear to act as plurals in their unmarked forms, requiring a special singulative marker *bu to denote individual members of a group (in this case, a single tree). Hence, the declension of a noun such as those would be: Of course, the very nature of this system would seem to indicate that words for "child", "father", "animal" etc. were doomed to act as agents in every sentence in Proto-Talgic, just as words for "forest", "mountain", "knife" would be condemned to be passive. The way around this was to have passive and active markers that could be applied to each noun in order to express cases normally reserved to the opposite class. Hence, *vibikuñ referred to a specifically passive child, *arkamañ referred to a name as an agent, and *ararag referred to an active forest. Applying these markers would sometimes slightly change the meaning of the original noun; for example, *ǧutuňh, an active root, meant water as something more or less sentient, and was applied to rivers, rain, and as the name of a deity. The word *arǧutuňh, however, while still meaning water, generally referred to lakes, puddles, and the substance as used by humans. Whether or not the use of these passive/active markers was to denote semantic or grammatical nuance was presumably understood through context.

Example Text
Kiŋamad (as) taniq.

Translation: I-being (who) sentient = I am a sentient being, I am Taniq, I am human

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

father(voc) which-us(gen), which-sky(loc), name(pass) which-you(gen) hallow(imp, pass). which-rule(stat) come(imp, stat).

Papap as-nakiña, asnamanid, rakamañ asnaunu ghunitik.

[ˈpapap ˌasnaˈkiŋa] [ˌasnaˈmanid] [raˈkamaŋ ˌasnaˈunu ɰuˈnitik]