[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Edgard escreust: >>> This is so like my conlang Rhodrese were >>> >>> Latin >>> >>> R, -D-, -RR > _r_ /4/ >>> >>> RR, DR, D'R N'R > _rr_ /R/ >>> >>> L-, L / V__V, -LL' > _l_ /l/ >>> >>> L / __(C, #) > _o_ /w/, /U/ >>> >>> LJ, GL, G'L, -C'L- > _gl_ /L/ >>> >>> LL, L'N, L'R, T'L, D'L > _ll_ /r`_l/ (aka /l\`/ aka /4\`/) >>> >>> Thus: >>> >>> ILLO PEDE > _el pier_ /pjE4/ pl. _il pir_ > > > pedem > pede > pere > pe:r > pier pedem > pEdem > pE:de > peEde > piEde > piEre > piEr > pede:s > pere:s > pries? : ) pede:s >>>> piEdes > piEdis >> piEri > piiri > pi:r > pir I.e. Rhodrese has Germanic-style umlaut! :-) Actually the fact that all three VL‑declensions ended up with a plural in -i was probably more likely due to analogy than to actual sound change of -e:s > -i and -ae > -i, not to mention '-as > -i' and '-os > -i'. The second person present singular of verbs is also formed with i-umlaut, which can be regular only in the fourth conjugation, and possibly in the second conjugation, tho most 2nd conj. verbs went over to the fourth. > >>>> ILLO PATRE > _el piar_ (Old Rh. _paerr_) pl. _il pier_!
>>> LAUDARE > _lauriar_ /l@w4'ja4 >>> > > reminds me of 'laurear' (portuguese) from laurus, lauru:s. No doubt from the adjective LAEREUS. That would become _leuriar_ in Rh.:laureare >> laurja:re >> leyra:re > l2yra:re >> l2yr&:r > l2yr&@r >> ly:re@r >> lyrjar
The O.Rh. spelling would have been _leuraer_, reflecting either the [l2yr&:r] or the [l2yr&@r] stage. In LAUDARE there was no VL /j/ or /i/ and so no umlaut; the a: > &: >>>>> ja change happened only after umlaut had ceased to operate. > >>> >>> ROTUNDU > _rodond_ /RU'dOnt/ > > > how is the 'mundus' reflex? mund or mond? _mon_, pl. _men_ (O.Rh. _mond, moend_ >>> >>> PETRA > _pierre_ /'pjERI/ >>> QUADRAGINTA > _quarrante_ > >> your conlang seems to preserve diphthongs well, as lauriar, I guess auru > > aur?; I can only think of romance languages that changed it to [o] or [ou]. > Aur is beautiful, btw... So I thought that if the second declension plural > was -ai in proto-Rhodrese ; ), it would go to -e, mixing singular and > plural... but you got the stems from the accusative, so... forget it ; )
Actually Rh. preserved only AU, which indeed did become [Ou] in O.Rh. O.Rh. acquired further diphthongs, mainly since after the Latin vowel length distinction was replaced by quality distinctions as described at <http://wiki.frath.net/User:Melroch/Vulgar_Latin> and where Rhodrese follows the 'Corsican' pattern (which in our universe is of doubtful validity) there arose new long vowels through lengthening of stressed vowels in open syllables, of which in Rhodrese all except the high /i:/ and /u:/ (and /y:/) were later (after i-umlaut) diphthongized: Latin Rh. VL Length Umlaut Diphth Old Rh. Mod Rh. ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ---------- ----------- i: i i: i: -- _i_ _i_ e: e e: e:/i: ei/i: _ei, i_ _ai, i_ i(/e( E E: E:/i: iE/i: _ie, i_ _ie, i_ a:/a( a &: &:/E: &@/iE _ea, ie_ _ia,ie_ u(/o( O O: O:/9: uO/y2 _uo, ue_ _uo, ue_ /2/ o: o o: o:/2: ou/2y _ou, eu_ _au, eu_ /y/ u u u: u:/y: -- _u, ui_ _u, eu_ /y/ There were also some further diphthongs arising from consonantal combinations like RUPTUM > ROPTU > rOutU > _rout_, HABITUM > AB'TU > autu > Out _out_, MAGIS > mEi _mei_, DIGITUM, DEJ'TU > dEid > _deid/deit_. These [ou]/[Ou] and [ei]/[Ei] pairs merged quite early -- possibly before umlaut. Add to this the diphthongs that arose from L-vocalization. AL, OL and U(L merged with AU but are still spelled differently _ao_, I:L was spelled _io_ in Middle Rh. but merged with /y/ and is spelled _eu_ in Mod.Rh. EL and I(L finally are still distinct /Ew/ and spelled _eo_. This is the main reason _au_ and _ao_ are still spelled differently: the umlaut of _au_ is _eu_ /y/ but the umlaut of _ao_ is _eo_ /Ew/. >>> PONERE HABET > _porrat_ /pU'Rat/ > > > 'he must put'? 's/he will put' That is the Romance synthetic future as CANTARE HABET > CANTARE HAT > _cantar há_ > _cantará_ (to exemplify with Portuguese). > > >>> >>> ILLU BELLU > _el bel_ >>> ILLA STELLA > _l'estelle_ >>> ILLO MALO > _el mao_ >>> ILLA MALA > _la male_ > > > 'mae' is that illegal? Unlike Portuguese Rhodrese doesn't lose intervocalic L and N, but in some dialects L vocalizalization did go further so there you will find _maoe_ /'mawI/ and _estele_ /I'stElI/ instead of the standard forms /'malI/ and /I'stEr`I/ (in the Rhodrese dialects' heartland south of Lojú). >>> >>> ILLO STAB'LU > _ell estabo_ >>> ILLI OC'LI > _igl egl_ > > > hard to say! the singular is... el ogl... de la aquile? Yes _el ogl_, the word is OCULUS 'eye'. >>> >>> ILLO FILIOLU > _el figláo_ pl. _il figléo_ >>> ILLA FIL[j]INA > _la figline_ pl. _il figlí_>>> ILLO FILIO > _el fegl_ pl. _il figl_ "child(ren)"
>>> (Old Rh. _el figl, il figl_) >>> >>>> Is there an excerpt with the vulgar latin to compare? I like it.
I should really make one. I have the Vulgate Xmas gospel lying around, which would be a suitable text, or the Tower of Babel, if I can find the Vulgate version (which I could). /BP The Stuttgart Vulgate text from <http://www.latinvulgate.com/verse.aspx?t=0&b=1&c=11> is below. I'll try to find time to work on a translation into Rhodrese. 11.1 erat autem terra labii unius et sermonum eorundem 11.1 And the earth was of one tongue, and of the same speech.11.2 cumque proficiscerentur de oriente invenerunt campum in terra Sennaar et habitaverunt in eo
11.2 And when they removed from the east, they found a plain in the land of Sennaar, and dwelt in it.
11.3 dixitque alter ad proximum suum venite faciamus lateres et coquamus eos igni habueruntque lateres pro saxis et bitumen pro cemento
11.3 And each one said to his neighbour: Come let us make brick, and bake them with fire. And they had brick instead of stones, and slime instead of mortar:
11.4 et dixerunt venite faciamus nobis civitatem et turrem cuius culmen pertingat ad caelum et celebremus nomen nostrum antequam dividamur in universas terras
11.4 And they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.
11.5 descendit autem Dominus ut videret civitatem et turrem quam aedificabant filii Adam
11.5 And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of Adam were building.
11.6 et dixit ecce unus est populus et unum labium omnibus coeperuntque hoc facere nec desistent a cogitationibus suis donec eas opere conpleant
11.6 And he said: Behold, it is one people, and all have one tongue: and they have begun to do this, neither will they leave off from their designs, till they accomplish them in deed.
11.7 venite igitur descendamus et confundamus ibi linguam eorum ut non audiat unusquisque vocem proximi sui
11.7 Come ye, therefore, let us go down, and there confound their tongue, that they may not understand one another's speech.
11.8 atque ita divisit eos Dominus ex illo loco in universas terras et cessaverunt aedificare civitatem
11.8 And so the Lord scattered them from that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city.
11.9 et idcirco vocatum est nomen eius Babel quia ibi confusum est labium universae terrae et inde dispersit eos Dominus super faciem cunctarum regionum
11.9 And therefore the name thereof was called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth was confounded: and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the face of all countries.