User talk:The Glossophile/Currently unnamed

Uhh, do you know that you can't rename your conlang just by snapping your fingers? Rostov-na-don 21:28, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

He can, its called moving The Emperor Zelos 21:30, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

True, but the old page is still there, and it looks ugly when you link something to a deleted page Rostov-na-don 21:34, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah guys... bummer, I know!

But I would have changed the name (like... every week or so...) even if I'd chosen a decent one from the beginning. I'm pretty unstable when it comes to things like these! :P I'll try not to be sloppy and leave any "leftovers" behind once I get the final name. Thanks for understanding (I hope ^_^)

The Glossophile 23:06, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

If you want to do that, try User:The Glossophile/Currently Unnamed rather than occupying public space. —Detectivekenny; (Info, talk) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 03:58, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Why
Why would you make /J/ be written as "Y"? The Emperor Zelos 17:17, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Because my conlang has a very strong polynesian flavour in it, but the sound /j/ doesn't really appear in any polynesian (pacific) language, so I write it the way an english speaker would have written it (since pretty much every language of the pacific uses the english version of the latin alphabet). Furthermore, near-pacific (but not polynesian) languages like japanese and korean use the [y] letter to show the sound /j/ (for example, in romajī) and my conlang is slightly inspired my them, too. That's why!

The Glossophile 18:31, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I say use J for it not Y as Y is more often a vowel

No... I'll keep it that way.

[j] reminds me more of french /ʒ/ or english /dʒ/.

In my conlang /y/ is a consonant (semi-vowel actually - I explain it in the phonology section), so it's ok by me. :)

The Glossophile 20:29, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

You guys... let him/her use whatever for their language... many languages use ‹y› for [j]. I myself don't even use ‹j› anymore..LctrGzmn 02:56, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

[it's him] Thanks for understanding! :) The Glossophile 04:56, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Cases
Hmm, while looking at your case system, I noticed that you do not have any case to mark indirect objects and other stuff not covered by the Nominative and Accusative cases, so I'd suggest you add an Oblique case. Rostov-na-don 21:02, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I've though of that already...

Other cases (like dative, genitive, locative, etc) are marked by the use of a particle (different for each case) plus the noun they modify. There is no need for other cases. The system is polynesian-like: minimum inflections, but great isolation. See languages like Hawaiian, Samoan, Tongan and others to understand what I'm talking about.

The Glossophile 00:53, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

I didn't mean inflections, I meant particles used for case marking. You could simplify it down to an Oblique/All situation case Rostov-na-don 11:01, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking of using the accusative case of the article or pronoun (alongside the particle marking the case). Maybe I should clarify that the accusative type /ho(i) ~ he(i)/ of the article is also the "oblique", or "all cases" type. The same thing goes with pronouns. The typical accusative stands by itself (no particle), that's what makes it differ. I'm gonna put "oblique" there right now, thanks!

The Glossophile 11:21, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

I changed the nominative/accusative cases to subjective/objective. That should take care of the case problem.

The objective case can denote every possible object -direct/indirect- and express every possible objective case (using the correct particle of course) -genitive/locative/instrumental/etc-. The Glossophile 03:31, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Verbal Things
You know, for a nearly completely isolational language, you are making a plausible, yet complex and inclusive verbal system Rostov-na-don 20:00, September 18, 2010 (UTC)