Talk:Harākti - Revision history

Aquatiki: /* Amazing */ new section

2015-02-16T14:22:02Z

Amazing: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:22, 16 February 2015
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:: Hm, ok, I'll just pretend I totally understood all that :P And the template seems to be working so I probably won't be changing it (given my usual luck, I'd just screw something up) :) [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 21:39, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		:: Hm, ok, I'll just pretend I totally understood all that :P And the template seems to be working so I probably won't be changing it (given my usual luck, I'd just screw something up) :) [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 21:39, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			== Amazing ==

			I just wanted to say, this is amazing. I've only studied Semitic languages, and Akkadian broke my brain. Your language is a triumph of ingenuity and hard work. Job well done!!! --[[User:Aquatiki\|Aquatiki]] ([[User talk:Aquatiki\|talk]]) 15:22, 16 February 2015 (CET)

Chrysophylax at 16:47, 11 October 2013

2013-10-11T16:47:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:47, 11 October 2013
Line 16:		Line 16:

	: In what way? I don't see it :P [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		: In what way? I don't see it :P [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			: Ha, the joke has escaped confinement from the cellars of FB! --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 18:47, 11 October 2013 (CEST)

	== Cuneiform ==		== Cuneiform ==

Chrysophylax at 16:46, 11 October 2013

2013-10-11T16:46:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:46, 11 October 2013
Line 11:		Line 11:
	: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			:: Yup! I'd put it somewhere between those chronologically as it shows hints of pulling towards "later common PIE" while still being pretty darn old school. Your idea for the development of gender is pretty cool, areal diffusion was probably how "PIE innovations" spread so it's highly possible that Harākti sort of picked up some gender (but not to the same extent as its younger siblings). --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 18:46, 11 October 2013 (CEST)

	I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Ashucky: /* Cuneiform */

2013-09-13T19:39:01Z

Cuneiform

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:39, 13 September 2013
Line 27:		Line 27:

	:Unfortunately, no :p As it's a CSS styling feature, the text to be “force-rendered” with the Akkadian font requires definition in a span-element. You could make your own simpler template if you wish, take a peek at [[User:Chrysophylax/cuneiform]] --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 19:45, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		:Unfortunately, no :p As it's a CSS styling feature, the text to be “force-rendered” with the Akkadian font requires definition in a span-element. You could make your own simpler template if you wish, take a peek at [[User:Chrysophylax/cuneiform]] --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 19:45, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			:: Hm, ok, I'll just pretend I totally understood all that :P And the template seems to be working so I probably won't be changing it (given my usual luck, I'd just screw something up) :) [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 21:39, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Chrysophylax: /* Cuneiform */

2013-09-13T17:45:48Z

Cuneiform

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:45, 13 September 2013
Line 26:		Line 26:
	::: Ah, ok, even better. :) Does it work even without the template? [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		::: Ah, ok, even better. :) Does it work even without the template? [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

	:Unfortunately, no :p ~~since~~ it's a CSS styling feature the text to be “force-rendered” with the Akkadian font ~~require~~ definition. You could make your own simpler template if you wish, take a peek at [[User:Chrysophylax/cuneiform]] --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 19:45, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		:Unfortunately, no :p As it's a CSS styling feature, the text to be “force-rendered” with the Akkadian font requires definition in a span-element. You could make your own simpler template if you wish, take a peek at [[User:Chrysophylax/cuneiform]] --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 19:45, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Chrysophylax: /* Cuneiform */

2013-09-13T17:45:18Z

Cuneiform

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:45, 13 September 2013
Line 25:		Line 25:

	::: Ah, ok, even better. :) Does it work even without the template? [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		::: Ah, ok, even better. :) Does it work even without the template? [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			:Unfortunately, no :p since it's a CSS styling feature the text to be “force-rendered” with the Akkadian font require definition. You could make your own simpler template if you wish, take a peek at [[User:Chrysophylax/cuneiform]] --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 19:45, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Ashucky at 17:11, 13 September 2013

2013-09-13T17:11:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:11, 13 September 2013
Line 13:		Line 13:

	I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			: In what way? I don't see it :P [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

	== Cuneiform ==		== Cuneiform ==
Line 21:		Line 23:

	::Nothing wrong with the coding, I just changed some CSS and uploaded the font to linguifex.com, thus even people without it on their PCs should see it :D --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 17:35, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		::Nothing wrong with the coding, I just changed some CSS and uploaded the font to linguifex.com, thus even people without it on their PCs should see it :D --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 17:35, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			::: Ah, ok, even better. :) Does it work even without the template? [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Chrysophylax: /* Cuneiform */

2013-09-13T15:35:49Z

Cuneiform

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 13 September 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:

	: Fixed the coding? Awesome, thanks! I just copy-pasted the template from Wikipedia, hehe - [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:17, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		: Fixed the coding? Awesome, thanks! I just copy-pasted the template from Wikipedia, hehe - [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:17, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			::Nothing wrong with the coding, I just changed some CSS and uploaded the font to linguifex.com, thus even people without it on their PCs should see it :D --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 17:35, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

Waahlis: /* Laryngeals */

2013-09-13T14:51:47Z

Laryngeals

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:51, 13 September 2013
Line 10:		Line 10:

	: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)


			I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

	== Cuneiform ==		== Cuneiform ==

Ashucky: /* Cuneiform */

2013-09-13T14:17:50Z

Cuneiform

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 13 September 2013
Line 14:		Line 14:

	Hoho, I did it! Everyone should see it now :D --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 03:47, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		Hoho, I did it! Everyone should see it now :D --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 03:47, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			: Fixed the coding? Awesome, thanks! I just copy-pasted the template from Wikipedia, hehe - [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:17, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:46, 11 October 2013
Line 11:		Line 11:
	: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		: I seem to have completely missed your discussion about the language here! You've actually pointed out a couple of problems I've been having with the language. Parts of its grammar show close relationship with Hittite while at the same time it shows the general agreement with other IE languages, vocabulary included. So you guys would place Harākti in a separate branch that split off sometime between the Anatolian and Italic/Celtic/Italo-Celtic splits? My idea behind the gender in Harākti was that it originally had an animate-inanimate distinction but it was influenced by a(n Italo-Celtic?) language with the three-way gender distinction because while it has gender, there's a lot of syncretism and feminine and masculine nuns are often declined the same, while neuter nouns are always declined separately, so pointing towards an earlier animate-inanimate distinction, perhaps. There's also no gender distinction between in participles (it's just masculine-feminine/animate vs. neuter/inanimate) ... [[User:Ashucky\|Ashucky]] ([[User talk:Ashucky\|talk]]) 16:15, 13 September 2013 (CEST)

			:: Yup! I'd put it somewhere between those chronologically as it shows hints of pulling towards "later common PIE" while still being pretty darn old school. Your idea for the development of gender is pretty cool, areal diffusion was probably how "PIE innovations" spread so it's highly possible that Harākti sort of picked up some gender (but not to the same extent as its younger siblings). --[[File:Admin.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Chrysophylax\|<span style="color: #3366BB ;">Chrysophylax</span>]]''' 18:46, 11 October 2013 (CEST)

	I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)		I think it's suspiciously similar to the Slovene language. [[File:Waahlis.png\|35px\|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis\|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 16:51, 13 September 2013 (CEST)