8,540
edits
Chlouvānem: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→External History
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
With time, the spiritual ancestors of Chlouvānem eventually became more and more fixed at least on certain, basic characteristics (e.g. the use of Austronesian alignment, or some 90% of the phonemic inventory), but I was refining those languages more and more every version.<br/> | With time, the spiritual ancestors of Chlouvānem eventually became more and more fixed at least on certain, basic characteristics (e.g. the use of Austronesian alignment, or some 90% of the phonemic inventory), but I was refining those languages more and more every version.<br/> | ||
Chlouvānem itself is the ninth radically restructured version of [[Laceyiam]]; I started creating it in late November 2016 as I found some parts of my conworld which were too unrealistic to work - and as such by changing the whole conworld I had to change the language. I took that opportunity to change some things in the grammar that, while I liked them and they worked well, I wanted to do in some different way — mainly this arises from my love of more complex inflection patterns. As such, compared to Laceyiam, Chlouvānem has much more influences from ''Sanskrit'' and ''Lithuanian'' (which always were my main influences anyway); other natlangs that influenced me a lot are ''Russian'', ''Adyghe'', ''Latvian'', ''Old Norse'' (and to a lesser extent also ''Danish'' and ''Icelandic''), ''Proto-Indo-European'', ''(Biblical) Hebrew'', ''Latin'', and ''Japanese'', while its actual in-world use is inspired by ''Arabic''. Still it is an a priori language and, despite having much in common with all of these (particularly with the IE ones), is also strikingly different (the Austronesian morphosyntactic alignment, morphological expression of evidentiality and more broadly the particular emphasis on moods probably being the most noticeable things). Moreover, I tried to create a language very different from my native language (Italian) while keeping many - not so apparent - similarities.<br /> | Chlouvānem itself is the ninth radically restructured version of [[Laceyiam]]; I started creating it in late November 2016 as I found some parts of my conworld which were too unrealistic to work - and as such by changing the whole conworld I had to change the language. I took that opportunity to change some things in the grammar that, while I liked them and they worked well, I wanted to do in some different way — mainly this arises from my love of more complex inflection patterns. As such, compared to Laceyiam, Chlouvānem has much more influences from ''Sanskrit'' and ''Lithuanian'' (which always were, together with ''Persian'', my main influences anyway); other natlangs that influenced me a lot are ''Russian'', ''Adyghe'', ''Latvian'', ''Old Norse'' (and to a lesser extent also ''Danish'' and ''Icelandic''), ''Old Church Slavonic'', ''Proto-Indo-European'', ''(Biblical) Hebrew'', ''Latin'', and ''Japanese'', while its actual in-world use is inspired by ''Arabic''. Still it is an a priori language and, despite having much in common with all of these (particularly with the IE ones), is also strikingly different (the Austronesian morphosyntactic alignment, morphological expression of evidentiality and more broadly the particular emphasis on moods probably being the most noticeable things). Moreover, I tried to create a language very different from my native language (Italian) while keeping many - not so apparent - similarities.<br /> | ||
The morphology of Chlouvānem is very different from Laceyiam, though many words are still the same (like ''smrāṇa'' (spring), ''junai'' (foot), ''jāyim'' (girl), ''saṃhāram'' (boy)). The name of the people in the language itself used to have ''-ou-'' too, but then I changed historical phonology just enough that it caused that to become ''-ǣ-''. Still I kept ''-ou-'' in the English name as I had used it too much and for too long in order to change it so easily. | The morphology of Chlouvānem is very different from Laceyiam, though many words are still the same (like ''smrāṇa'' (spring), ''junai'' (foot), ''jāyim'' (girl), ''saṃhāram'' (boy)). The name of the people in the language itself used to have ''-ou-'' too, but then I changed historical phonology just enough that it caused that to become ''-ǣ-''. Still I kept ''-ou-'' in the English name as I had used it too much and for too long in order to change it so easily. | ||