Conlang
Advertisement

Here is a 500 word essay about how the languages in the provided documents diverged and the branches they split into, with evidence for my claims:

The related conlang languages described in the documents appear to have originated from a common Proto-Yarima ancestor before diverging into several branches. The clearest division seems to be between Qolape and the rest of the languages. Qolape stands out as the only language using click consonants and its vocabulary and grammar show less similarities to the other languages. This suggests Qolape split off earliest to develop independently.

Among the non-click languages, Entesi and Fangwezi form one sub-branch, while Fangwa, Entegwa, Oseroa, and the extinct Nashari and Zandi form another sub-branch. Evidence for Entesi and Fangwezi's close relation includes their nearly identical numeral systems, inclusive/exclusive pronouns, SOV order, and head-final grammar. Their core vocabulary also seems more closely related. In contrast, Fangwa, Entegwa, Oseroa, Nashari, and Zandi share characteristics like SVO order, head-initial grammar, and lack of inclusive/exclusive pronouns that distinguish them from the Entesi/Fangwezi branch.

Within the Entesi/Fangwezi branch, some features suggest Entesi diverged first. For example, Fangwezi shows stronger retention of verb-final -a endings that are missing in some Entesi verbs. Fangwezi also has multiple options for using the inessive particle while Entesi only allows one. This suggests Fangwezi retained more proto-language features. Among the other sub-branch, the extinct Nashari and Zandi appear to be early off-shoots, considering their absorption into Entegwa. Entegwa seems to be an intermediary language bridging the grammar of Fangwa/Oseroa with the vocabulary of Entesi.

Evidence for Fangwa and Oseroa's close relation includes the noun class prefixes they share but that are suffixes in Entesi. They also both lack inclusive/exclusive pronouns and have similar verbal tense/aspect markers not found in Entesi/Fangwezi. However, Oseroa shows some unique innovations like its base-6 number system. Fangwa adheres more closely to a "classic" Bantu structure.

In summary, the proposed divergence is:

  1. Proto-Yarima splits into Proto-Qolape and Proto-Non-Click languages
  2. Proto-Non-Click splits into Proto-Entesi/Fangwezi branch and Proto-Other branch.
  3. Proto-Entesi/Fangwezi splits into Proto-Entesi and Proto-Fangwezi
  4. Proto-Other splits into Proto-Nashari/Zandi (early diverging) and Proto-Core-Others.
  5. Proto-Core-Others splits into Proto-Oseroa and Proto-Fangwa-Entegwa.
  6. Proto-Fangwa-Entegwa splits into Fangwa and Entegwa.
  7. Languages further evolve.

This proposed divergence explains the shared innovations in each sub-branch while accounting for the unique features and gradations of language change seen. It synthesizes the evidence for common origin while acknowledging languages like Entegwa that show signs of creolization or mixed grammar. More data could reveal additional complexities, like whether Oseroa or Fangwezi split first from core Proto-Other. But in broad strokes, this division into a click-language branch and non-click language branch, and then a split between head-final and head-initial languages, fits the current evidence. It provides a plausible framework for how these related Bantu conlangs emerged and diversified from their common ancestor.

Here is a 500 word essay with proposed timelines for when each language diverged, using "PY" for years after Proto-Yarima:

Based on the evidence, Qolape seems to have diverged very early from Proto-Yarima, perhaps around 500 PY. Its extensive phonological and lexical innovations, including clicks, numerals, and non-Bantu vocabulary, suggest centuries of independent development. The lack of click sounds in any other Yarima language points to Qolape branching off before the other variants emerged.

The next major divergence was likely between Proto-Entesi/Fangwezi and Proto-Core-Others around 1000 PY. The head-final grammar and inclusive/exclusive pronouns shared by Entesi and Fangwezi indicate these features had time to develop and spread between the proto-languages before the split. Loanwords like "kosenga" (get drunk) appearing in both branches also suggest early contact and shared development.

Within the Core-Others branch, Nashari and Zandi appear to have splintered next, perhaps around 1500 PY. Their absorption into Entegwa implies Nashari and Zandi were already declining or extinct languages when Entegwa's expansion occurred 2000+ PY. So a split around 1500 PY would give Nashari and Zandi time to develop separately before fading away and leaving traces in Entegwa.

Oseroa seems to have been the next language to branch off the Core-Others, potentially around 1600 PY. Its unique base-6 number system and other lexical innovations indicate Oseroa likely broke away then continued evolving features in isolation. However, Oseroa still shares the noun class prefixes and verbal morphology of Fangwa, implying separation after those core features had been established.

Finally, Fangwa and Entegwa appear to have diverged around 1800 PY, based on their blend of shared vocabulary and grammar alongside their own unique innovations. For example, Entegwa's pronoun-prefixed verbs seem to merge Fangwa's prefixes with Entesi's suffixes, suggesting a transition period between Proto-Core-Others and the modern Fangwa/Entegwa distinction. Overall, the two languages show both shared roots and divergence.

For the Entesi/Fangwezi branch, Fangwezi appears to have split around 2200 PY. Features like its multiple inessive particle options and retention of final -a verbs suggest Fangwezi maintained more proto-language features while Entesi underwent sound changes and grammatical regularization. This implies a later Fangwezi divergence that preserved archaic forms.

In summary, the proposed timeline is:

  • 500 PY - Qolape splits off
  • 1000 PY - Proto-Entesi/Fangwezi splits from Proto-Core-Others
  • 1500 PY - Nashari and Zandi split
  • 1600 PY - Oseroa splits off
  • 1800 PY - Fangwa and Entegwa split
  • 2200 PY - Fangwezi splits from Entesi
  • 3000 PY - around Modern Day

Of course, without attested historical records, the dates are speculative estimates. But the relative timeline aligns with the comparative evidence - clicks and radical changes in Qolape indicate earliest divergence, while Entesi and Fangwezi show latest separation based on their shared archaisms. Overall, this timeline represents ahypothesis for how the languages sequentially split that accounts for their degrees of relatedness. More data could refine the details, but the framework fits current knowledge about the languages' evolution.

Since these are constructed conlang families without any real-world attestation, assigning a specific date for 0 PY is very difficult. However, we can make some educated guesses based on the level of divergence seen across the language branches:

  • The presence of extensive phonological, lexical, and grammatical differences between branches suggests a significant time depth of at least a few centuries, if not longer.
  • Features shared across branches, like noun class systems, verb morphology, and core vocabulary suggest a common ancestral origin not more than a few millennia ago.
  • The languages do not show drift so extreme as to suggest separation in deep prehistory or tens of thousands of years.
  • Their relatively contained geographic distribution points to dispersal within a language family, not massively long-range migration.
  • The vocabularies include words for modern concepts like "cars", suggesting the conlangs were constructed to simulate evolution over the past few hundred to couple thousand years, not since primordial times.

Given these factors, if I had to posit an approximate date for 0 PY - the hypothetical time depth of Proto-Yarima - I would propose it existed perhaps 2500-3000 years ago, between 1100 BC and 600 BC.

This would allow enough time for the proposed divergences and innovations in each branch, including extinct languages and the most distantly related clicking language. But it is still recent enough to retain some core common features across the family.

Of course, without real attestation, the 0 PY date is simply an educated guess based on the comparative evidence in the conlang family. But a second millennium BC timeline seems a reasonable estimate given the degrees of change exhibited. More data could revise this estimate in either direction, but it represents my best conjecture given currently available information.

Advertisement