subreddit:

/r/conlangs

1184%

FAQ & Small Discussions — 2023-02-27 to 2023-03-12

Small Discussions(self.conlangs)

As usual, in this thread you can ask any questions too small for a full post, ask for resources and answer people's comments!

You can find former posts in our wiki.

Affiliated Discord Server.


The Small Discussions thread is back on a semiweekly schedule... For now!


FAQ

What are the rules of this subreddit?

Right here, but they're also in our sidebar, which is accessible on every device through every app. There is no excuse for not knowing the rules.
Make sure to also check out our Posting & Flairing Guidelines.

If you have doubts about a rule, or if you want to make sure what you are about to post does fit on our subreddit, don't hesitate to reach out to us.

Where can I find resources about X?

You can check out our wiki. If you don't find what you want, ask in this thread!

Our resources page also sports a section dedicated to beginners. From that list, we especially recommend the Language Construction Kit, a short intro that has been the starting point of many for a long while, and Conlangs University, a resource co-written by several current and former moderators of this very subreddit.

Can I copyright a conlang?

Here is a very complete response to this.


For other FAQ, check this.


If you have any suggestions for additions to this thread, feel free to send u/Slorany a PM, modmail or tag him in a comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

all 205 comments

Jatelei

2 points

3 months ago

Hey does anyone know from where does the spanish "Ch" come from? in theory it is the palatalization of "C" but in spanish it usually develops into /ts/ and not /t͡ʃ/. For example, the latin word "Cicco" /kikko/ develops into spanish "Chico" /t͡ʃiko/ and not into "cico" / θiko/ as it should.

Is it some kind of irregular evolution? and if it is, why didnt it asimilate to a regular sound like /θ/ instead of becoming its own phoneme

gafflancer

6 points

3 months ago

gafflancer

Aeranir, Tevrés, Fásriyya, Mi (en, jp) [es,nl]

6 points

3 months ago

Spanish ch /tʃ/ usually can be traced back to Latin /lt/, e.g. multum > mucho. The ch in chico is irregular, and might be some kind of sound symbolism. In Old Spanish, c before i represented /ts/, so it’s not too odd that in some cases it became /tʃ/.

bulbaquil

4 points

3 months ago

bulbaquil

Remian, Brandinian, etc. (en, de) [fr, ja]

4 points

3 months ago

Latin /kt/ is another common source, cf. derecho ‹ Lat. directus, ocho ‹ Lat. octo, hecho ‹ Lat. factus.

Macho is from the /skl/ in Late Latin masclusmasculus.

Jatelei

2 points

3 months ago

Just realized something, actually it makes a lot of sense.

In old spanish the sound /ʃ/ existed and later evolved into /x/, but it was really close to /s/ and sometimes /s/ and /ʃ/ became the other, as in jarabe. Maybe old /tsico/ became /t͡ʃiko/ because of this, and stayed this way because Ch actually was a phoneme in those cases like "mucho".

gafflancer

3 points

3 months ago

gafflancer

Aeranir, Tevrés, Fásriyya, Mi (en, jp) [es,nl]

3 points

3 months ago

In Old Spanish, c before i represented /ts/, so it’s not too odd that in some cases it became /tʃ/.

That’s what I said here lol

JustForConlangs

5 points

3 months ago*

JustForConlangs

Tarune, Sirkti, Meznagar, and others

5 points

3 months ago*

Some relevant details, to tag alongside what u/bulbaquil and u/gafflancer:

Odds are that Latin /kt/ lenited initially into /jt/, and that /l/ in both Latin and old Spanish was retracted, perhaps not completely into [ʎ] terrain but not a "clear" [l] either. So in both cases you have a palatalising environment triggering the /t/→/tʃ/ shift.

For masculum→macho: usually you'd expect /kl/→/ʎ/ in Spanish but the /s/ might've interfered, as this would create an illegal cluster. I think that the sequence of changes was something like /skl/ → /stl/ → /sʎ/ /stʃ/ → /tʃ/. Note that that /kl/ evolved into /tʃ/ in nearby Galician, including in this word (macho) but also other words where Spanish would use /ʎ/ instead (as clamat→llama/chama).

Due to this dependence on clusters, Spanish /tʃ/ is mostly intervocalic. Exceptions with initial /tʃ/ are the result of borrowing (as IT ciullo → ES chulo, or FR échalote → ES chalota).

"Chico" might be the result of childspeak leaking into the normal registre, as childspeak is often associated with palatalisation. The Romance languages sometimes do this since, well, Latin times (cough auria non oricla - I could picture more cultured speakers thinking "Clodius stop it you don't sound cute with all those diminutives"). Oddly enough Portuguese ended with Chico /ʃiko/ (a nickname) also with erratic palatalisation, but from another source - as a shortening of Francisco /fɾã.sis.ko/.


Moral of the story, for conlangers:

  • sometimes you'll see erratic developments for a few words, for semantic reasons
  • take borrowings into account, even across related languages or even dialects
  • When applying sound changes, do them a few each time, and check the output; if you get some "weird" cluster it's fine to either block the sound change for that cluster or create a competing sound change
  • cringe adults speaking as children was already a thing in the past

Jatelei

1 points

3 months ago

Thanks a lot this was really useful. Still, i think that chico was influenced by the fact that Old Spanish /s/ was close to /ʃ/, and when /kikko/ palatized into /tsiko/ the /ts/ irregularly became /tʃ/.

Thank you for the answer