Talk:Klyros Language

From PSwiki
Revision as of 01:22, 18 January 2013 by Daevaorn (talk | contribs) (→‎Konos formation)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Just thought I'd open this discussion so that there could be communication between people who are working on this language. -bguy

interjections

there is no category corresponding to interjections in Klyros, I think new need this. There is would be to was to do this. One the interjections would have no grammatical or formation relation to the other parts of the language. Or two there is a prefix meaning to express which would be affixed to words to make the interjections. We could even have different ones for agreement/confusion and emotion ones as well as postie and negative. For example

eq = agreement interjections, (yes, indeed ah,) and ones that ask if you agree (do you want it a?)

eeq = confusion (um, what, er,)

iq = positive emotion (aw it cute, oh its grate)

iiq = negative emotion (ough, aw he died,)

I think a vowel 1st would be best as most sudden interjections in English start that way and the Q can be sharp or drawled out. the This will not give us onomatopoeia (if you change the representation of a sound then defeats the purpose of being an onomatopoeia) or hellos and goodbys which in English are treated as interjections

Seems an interesting addition for the street klyran to me. I agree with Grigori though that there's the need to expand the vocabulary first, in order at least to cover the Basic English vocabulary. I wonder if we could help the task by pasting here a list of the 850 words of Ogden's basic english[1] --Boeven 20:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Basic English vocabulary

I'd suggest everyone (for now I am the only one working on the project, but still) to expand vocabulary to Basic English. Other words like "really cool meaning of some new word" can wait --Grigori 04:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm really fascinated by the language. As soon as I can, I'll contribute. Feel free to contact me --Boeven 18:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Categorisation of Ideogram Files

Hi all, y'know I hate to be a pain, but when you upload new/replacement ideograms, would you mind making sure that they're in the Klyros Ideograms category..? It's just that (at the time of writing this) 126 of the 144 files in the Uncategorized Files category belong to this language project. Thanks. - Ethryn 23:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, could you come to some agreement as to the image format you intend to use... we have duplicate images in various file formats. See Category_talk:Klyros_Ideograms for some idea of what I mean. Thanks. -- Ethryn 11:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I will work on categorization in following days. Klyros ideograms will be moved into Klyros Ideograms, while obsolete ideograms will be moved to Images to be erased. --Grigori 07:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Usage of Kefaos

I think it would be good to expand upon this section, but I am not sure how I would do so. Any ideas? -bguy


Knubixos

The only use for Knubixos I can think of is signifying that word is someone's signature. Are there any other uses anyone can think of because that? -bguy

Well, it can be used as punctuation like end of sentence or end of paragraph or something.
--Grigori 17:59, 20 May 2009 (PDT)
In the typography section it says that there is no punctuation, just spaces for end of sentences and half spaces for end of words, and even those are optional.
-bguy


Konos and Kzanos morphology

It looks like it is now required strongly to specify strict morphology of konos and kzanos. There must be a set of rules that can at least clearly define word class and the root of it. As we have some material on it I think that word class is to be defined by one prefix, sometimes two. I strongly recommend not to implement other types of prefixes.

Otherwise there will be no language but mess of things.

For now I start to look at current honoring "wo-" prefix with indignation.

Also for konos there can be several of them derived from single ksin. It should be some sub-class suffix I think. We now have only "-san" and "-sin". It should be more. I think something for place where the action takes place, result of it maybe. I wonder if we could you Hrothgart's ideograms qu, qa etc. It still shall be considered and discussed.

--Grigori 05:27, 21 May 2009 (PDT)

Perhaps prefixes should be reserved for word class as you said, and also very important descriptors, so it would work as a title of degree. For example, ksiblimwo would mean "a brother I honor" while kwosiblim means "an honorable brother that you should honor as well". This would allow for more word diversity, and if it is noted that the practice is mostly for poetic effect, it would take care of the multitudes of prefixes that are derived from suffixes.
-bguy
Once again, the potential difficulty that we could face in further developing is to define the root. For example kwosiblim is "wo" the root or "sib"?
I've been thinking for quite some time on idea of special silent words that are used to split honoring prefixes/suffixes from the main.
Like ksiblim-wo instead of ksiblimwo and wo-ksiblim instead of kwosiblim. Much more clear for me. Being silent word it show have no sounds of it own but while spelling maybe it could mean little bit longer pause between syllables. It would however look like Japanese transliteration. You know, Somebody-kun, Someone-sama :).
--Grigori 04:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. Would there be an ideogram to represent this, or would it be limited to transliteration? Also would it be a strict requirement for grammar, or used as needed for differing situations?
- Ideogram will be better I think. Or maybe two - for splitting the word core from (dis)honoring prefixes and suffixes. As for use. Well, it could be optional but still recommended. What would you think? --Grigori 23:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Knetos Morphology

In the current morphology of Knetos, you describe them as Net with a specific suffix. How does this show spatial relationships or other prepositions, and if it is just such, what is the purpose as these are already described in the Ksinos' suffixes? -bguy

It's just I cannot yet find good enough ideograms for spatial and temporal relations. For now there is only "netqo" - analogous to "at" in English. But for now there is no "from" or "to" knetos. As for dublication... maybe we'll get rid of it later. --Grigori 14:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Dublication removed hehe.--Grigori 16:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Kzanos and desriptive ksinos?

It looks like Klyran now lacks kzanos. It is not about their number but about concept. For example how can we write "red house". I concern "red" now. There should be certain ksin as base of word "red". If it is "to be red" ksin then we need a whole class of ksinos of type "to be ..." (blue, kind, strong, gentle, shy, weak, etc.). And for that class kzanos starting with zan- are derived.

Otherwise we should change original idea of Klyran as verb-only-base language.

--Grigori

My opinion on this is that Kzanos would be a more figurative language. For example, "fuu" means to shroud or to hide, while "xufuu" could mean black. "Xunwos" (under the assumption Klyran blood is red) could be red, "xulim" sky blue, "xumil" ocean blue, etc. As this is a klyros language, association between colors and words don't have to "make sense" to the general population, as long as it "makes sense" to Klyros of the long ago when it was made. If you don't object to this, we could add to the Language page a list of colors and their words,
--Bguy 12:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  1. At least lets don't use "xu-" for descriptive kzanos. Let it be "zan-". "xu-" is for possessive.
  2. It really would be complicated. So a ksin has meaning as verb and also as adverb/adjective if "zan-" is added to the beginning with little logical connection with the verb. It can save us much time on drawing ideograms of course but we'll for each ideogram make 2 such senses (verb & adverb/adjective).
--Grigori 04:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
  1. Sorry, I had a thought xu was descriptive for some reason.
  2. It doesn't have to be complicated. We could have a list of 10 or so colors, and those would be the only colors (others would be like greenish-blue so a mix of two words). Not every word needs a separate descriptive. Zanbel just could mean "like a cry" or "crying" in gerund form (is it gerund?) and zanda could be "thankful".
--Bguy 13:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
So be it. Still we need many adjectives so I'll soon change Vocabulary table.
Well, we could need several kzanos derived from single root but for such we could use some sub-class suffixes.
--Grigori 15:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
IF you use sub-class suffixes, perhaps it could be different senses, like sound, taste, sight, smell, touch... and maybe two more creative ones...
--Bguy 18:31, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Lets leave it so far.--Grigori 16:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok. We left it for some time. And now I just sense I cannot develop the language in the direction chosen. If ksinos - verbs are the CORE of language, then how could I write terms that are not anyhow connected to any process. Platinum, oil, sky, crystal. Its not only Konos, its kzanos as well. I don't know what to do. I more and more desire to change the principle of verbs as fundament of Klyran.--Grigori 13:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Grammar

How many tenses should Klyran have? Common has more then dozen, its quite complicated especially as many are not English-speakers.

Some languages have only past, present and future. Much simpler especially as many players use Common that way (like saying Present Simple "Person waves" instead of Present Progressive "Person is waving" or Present perfect "Person has waved").

I've already simplified this with the auxiliary word "a." (read under ksinos, there are a couple paragraphs about this) The only tenses are past, present, and future. In "Person is Waving" it would become "person waves" as in current grammar the Auxiliary is removed and there is no "ing" ending.
--Bguy 12:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, then few more to discuss:
There should be sort of conjunctive mood, imperative mood and infinitive. As for conjunctive mood I'd like it to be simple "-je" suffix. Dunno about infinitive, but for imperative we could make several possible suffixes. Like "asking" suffix, "begging" suffix, "commanding" one or even "threatening" one :).
Morethere we still should define aspects. Ok, no continuous one. What is left? Perfective and imperfective?
--Grigori 15:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I really like the moods idea. About the aspects, a few of your suffixes work as aspects, as using them when they are optional puts emphasis on them. To keep it simple, I'd suggest that all are optional as we have been doing. I don't believe Klyran needs to have a strict grammar, such as a subject-predicate order or the like. Klyran would be a language of major variance to represent different cultures, in this way, I believe that for every "complex" grammar rule, it has a defined, simplified, and negated versions to be able to be used. Such as with the suffixes for example. Lack of suffixes is "negated," sin and san only is "simplified," and all the others added in is the "defined." I think it works well this way.
--Bguy 16:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, anything can be actually optional if it can be defined from the context or actually is not something really important for sense core.
Lets think about mood. If the sentence have no subject then the only verb should be interpreted as one in imperative mood (as in English). There could be imperative mood suffix, but it is optional, to clarify whether it is begging, command or something else. If there is sequence of 2 verbs then the last can be considered as infinitive with no special particle "to" like in English. But still, I'd prefer simple grammar only with methods of clarifying. There should optional suffix for infinitive. And for conjunctive mood... there must be a suffix, not optional otherwise you won't distinguish it with indicative mood, so let it be "-je".
However optionality and non-strict grammar rules clearly must have limits. We can't violate subject-predicate order, there would be no difference in "I rob you" and "You rob me". There are of course languages with no strict word order, but they have grammatical cases of words. Believe me, when I say we don't want it here.
--Grigori 01:20, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


Textbook

Well, the language becomes more and more formed. And with it more and more grammatical components of it are described in the article. It becomes difficult to understand it. We need a textbook. "Learning Klyran for dummies"... He-he :D. --Grigori 01:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I was actually going to write this and try to submit it to Jayose Library if the Explorers are still open for submissions. --Bguy 13:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Common words

As Klyros have lived for so long in Yliakum, they need to be able to write Common words in Klyran. Even if we consider Klyran language as abandoned one and recently recovered and re-learned there is still need in writing at least names. There are two ways I see:

  1. To imitate the spelling with Klyran ideograms. Not a good way.
  2. To have new class of ideograms - Common liters.

I think the second is better but it is going to take some time. I will work on it. --Grigori 01:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

This is ok, but I think its only purpose is for translating names out of Klyran origin and for Klyran to common transliteration. I think a simplified alphabet would do the trick. Perhaps 14 letters? (You can easily get this by combining repeat letters like g and j; c, k, and x; b and v, e and i; ch and sh; etc.)--Bguy 13:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't get it. How can I rid of 12 liters? Ok, instead of "x" I get "ks", "v" instead of "w", "q"="ku", But what is with the rest?--Grigori 07:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
As I said, simplified. Here is one right now. A, C, D, E, F, G, L, M, N, O, P, R, S, T, V, SH. 16 letters is enough. Any word using letters out of these can be simplified. Butterfly -> Voterfla. It sounds awkward, but it will due for its limited use.--Bguy 13:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Too complicated IMHO. And after all as Klyros mainly use Common nowadays there must had been cultural integration process that must have affected the Klyros language as well. Well, maybe they didn't use all Common alphabet, but 16 is not enough. I will edit the article and add all 26 liters. In future we could remove some. --Grigori 11:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Words

I'm thinking most single-ideographic words should be one syllable long, two max. I also think there should be a big diversity among the words so they take advantage of all the letters and all 11 vowels (a, e, i, o, u, aa, ee, ii, oo, uu, and '). Should there be other guide lines and are these good enough to declare guidelines? -bguy

I also agree on one syllable MUST be prefered. Otherwise we are to have transliterations that can be interpreted too many ways with too many senses. As for diversity you will soon find that as you add more and more ideograms, pronouncing diversity will vanish anyway so there is not much sense in trying to increase diversity now.--Grigori 17:56, 20 May 2009 (PDT)

Konos formation

For every language many words, particularly nouns share the same root. For example "brother" and "brotherhood", "payer", "payee" and "payment". There must be distinguishing between them inside class of konos. The only way I see to do it is to develop further suffixes. For now it is "sin" (-er) and "san" (ee) only. I think we should add more for naming nouns that somehow relate to the ksin that is the root. For example, a tool that was used for doing the action, a one who assisted the action, for one who opposed the action and so on.--Grigori 17:56, 20 May 2009 (PDT)

Sounds reasonable, but the Klyros Language is also an adaptive and flexible one, so too many additions like this might might it to inflexible. Also, I don't think it should be a carbon copy of Common, so that it has its own uniqueness in most sections. Personally I thought that sin, san, and the lack of them would be enough for the most part, but if you can think of one or two more very useful ones, I wouldn't disagree.
-bguy
I entirely agree with bguy here. On reading the list of suffixes 1-15 that has been added to the Konos section, I must say I don't see the point in most of them. Why would one need to distinguish a place where an action happens by a suffix? Not very economic. Complexity without reason is something that usually does not exists in a language, at least not for long. And then those suffixes that have a justification are mostly redundant:
1. the one who does the process is expressed with the unmodified konos, like 'klyr'
2. check, that one makes sense and is a must!
15./16. the process itsself and the doing of the process would both be the gerund and can be expressed by a nominalisation of the process-indicated ksin "lyrsen" - "living, alive" and "klyrsen" - "(the) living/state of being alive"
all the rest, I can be safely ommited from the rules to be formed flexibly and "on demand" with a matching ksin as a suffix.
--Daevaorn 01:00, 18 January 2013 (CET)

Vocabulary itself

I think after describing ideograms we shall at last have transliteration vocabulary at the end of the page. But it is much of work that should be done while no change of ideograms (except draws). So we must all agree on that stage of work to start.--Grigori 17:56, 20 May 2009 (PDT)

If you could set up an extra column I'd be able to start that a bit, and transliteration isn't too much work. If we decided to change the word, the transliteration could easily be change along with it.
-bguy

Numeral Ideograms

I think the ideogram for number 4 needs to be changed due to it not being a natural progression from the ideogram for 3. The number 3 has the long slash from the top-right to bottom-left, and two shorter top-right to bottom-left slashes above and below the larger slash. However, the number 4 -loses- the lower, short slash. If I were writing these out as incremental tick marks on a piece of paper, which Klyran can get away with, I would have to bust out the eraser and erase a portion of the ideogram when incrementing from 3 to 4.

Simply rotating the three short slashes in numeral 4 clockwise 90 degrees would solve this. I argue clockwise instead of counter-clockwise because it seems like all of the other numeral ideograms have new slashes starting at the left or the top, not the bottom.

I'm no linguist; it just doesn't flow right for me. :P --Mreeske 02:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Changed. --Grigori 05:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)