[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
At 03:38 03/02/2004, Nik Taylor wrote:
Carl Edlund Anderson wrote:
> But of course! :)I was planning to restore the first two in my conlang as
> <dakruma> and <dingwa> (I actually decided for banish use of <c> for /k/
> because it looked "too Real World Latin" :)
Here's an interesting proposal, this alter-Latin, instead of inventing a
new letter G, instead simply adopted a convention of separating K and C,
such that {K} represented /k/ and {C} represented /g/ (Or some other way
of dividing the K/C/Q trio). :-)
A good point. I had already decided to use <q> on its own to represent /kw/ (they get an eqos rather than an equus). And for various reasons, I need /kwu/ to eventually turn into /ko/, but I'll sort that out later.
Actually, I was going to equip (or possibly eqip ;) my pseudo-Latin with an alternate script system as well, and I haven't finished devising it. I intended to model the scripts origins on the semi-pictographic forms of the early Semitic alphabet, but then attach the original pictographs to names from a non-Semitic language and take it from there .... So I ought to end up with graphs that have some relation to our alphabet, but everything will look very different when written. However, for simplicity, I should probably transcribe the soudns in Latin characters when discussing them here :)
I've been hammering away at getting a rough overview of my pseudo-Latin family, basic noun paradigms (modeled on archaic Latin), and the transformation of those paradigms into "vulgar pseudo-Latin" set up, but it's not quite gelled yet ....
Cheers, Carl -- Carl Edlund Andersonhttp://www.carlaz.com/