folkspraak : Messages : 7989-8018 of 14605

Does anyone know a good source for Proto-Germanic words? I use a
couple of web sites (which use different orthographies) and have a few
books with limited content, but want to find a good comprehensive
source.

Thanks R

#7991

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 9:48 am
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

parked71

Do you know about this one?

http://fordsmender.50megs.com/pgmn.html

tungol65 wrote:

> Does anyone know a good source for Proto-Germanic words? I use a
> couple of web sites (which use different orthographies) and have a few
> books with limited content, but want to find a good comprehensive
> source.
>
> Thanks R
>
>
>
>
> Browse the draft word lists!
> http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
>
> Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> English second language
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+l\
anguage&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig\
=CBIz1NU5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
>  Second language acquisition
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+seco\
nd+language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&\
.sig=HEDaJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
>  Second language learning
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+\
language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.si\
g=gTURDLHJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
>
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

#7992

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 10:11 am
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

tungol65

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> Do you know about this one?
>
> http://fordsmender.50megs.com/pgmn.html

Yeah I know that one thanks, I also use

http://members.aol.com/rlongman1/protoger.html

As you can see the orthography between the two is different (though
not to difficult to work out). Also the forms of words given are
different.

acorn n *akrōnan
acorn n *akr�naz

I suppose as PG is only a derived language there is no standard form
or orthography?

> tungol65 wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know a good source for Proto-Germanic words? I use a
> > couple of web sites (which use different orthographies) and have
a few
> > books with limited content, but want to find a good comprehensive
> > source.
> >
> > Thanks R
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Browse the draft word lists!
> > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
> >
> > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > English second language
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+l
anguage+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=CBIz1NU
5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
> >  Second language acquisition
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+second+language&w2=Seco
nd+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=HED
aJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
> >  Second language learning
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+
language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=gTURDL
HJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
> >       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
> >
> >     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> >     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> >

#7993

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 10:40 am
Subject: Re: Latin words in Moritz Macke's proposal?

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Moritz Macke" <morm83@y...> wrote:
> --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@w...>
wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm, maybe too late to comment on, but I wondered about the examples
> > of some words in Moritz Macke's vowel proposal:
> >
> > 1st, a short vowel in horn, "rn" is two consonants in a row, though,
> > so maybe that could be accepted, (unless we have the rule that when
> > the 1st consonant is r, the vowel is long: woord, aars, waarning,
> > hoorn, koorn käär(e)l(man, lad) etc.)

Unless the r is followed by two vowels, such as "Furst" (German
"Prince") fyrst or erst(?=first)
To avoid exceptions, we could hava a schwa-like e inserted to indicate
the pronunciation aernest=serious(ae is an ae ligature.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fürst

Just thinking aloud.

> > Hmmm, when I think about this rule, it starts to make quite much
> sense...
>
> Heh, to be honest I put the whole thing together pretty quickly and
> didn't think anyone would look that closely at the words...
> The length rules are not supposed to be that strict anyway since it
> varies a lot locally but are you saying the words you listed should
> have long vowel? They are all short in German...
>

Really, I know "Wort" have, but the others? In Swedish, these words
have usually long vowels and retroflex consonants.

(Also maybe "art"-(wise, way, method, manner) although there could be
better choices, since this word is only found in German and
Scandinavian, "Kunst" for English "art" )

> >
> > 2nd, the stress/ long vowels for most Latin examples seem wrong, have
> > these words been "nativized" or what is the reasoning behind this.
> > This pronunciation seems weird in most cases, and I don't think the
> > German pronunciation is that different from the Swedish...
> >
> > <i-> [i:] Gigant, Frid, Figur - (giant, peace, figure)
> > <u> [u:] du, Natur, human - (you, nature, humane)
> >
> > (Why not gigant, figu:r, natu:r, huma:n ?)
>
> You are right, they are wrong, I had some trouble finding long i and u
> that had not turned into diphtongs in German and Dutch so I went for
> loanwords but didn't think about it enough to make sure they are
> really long.

OK...

> I have some problems generally to tell which vowels are short unless
> they are followed by a double consonant. The i in "Figur", "Gigant"
> sure seems longer than in "Will", "still" but is not really a long
> vowel either. Maybe it's the difference between [i] and [I] I am
> hearing, I feel I am really a bit challenged when trying to figure out
> the sound I am hearing/saying...

Maybe because of the stress?

> >
> > <ö-> [2:] grön, dösan, fölan - (green, doze, feel)
> >
> > I think I would choose "du:s" or "do:s" instead, but "d2:s" is okay...
> >
> > <ou> [o:U] Oug, Boum, Broud, Houved - (eye, tree, bread, head)
> > I tried to pronounce this, and it seems quite good, although it might
> > turn into a glide or something.
>
> It's supposed to be an "au" with "o" instead of "a" roughly, just
> saying simple [o:] works too though, a single "correct" pronunciation
> of FS will be pretty much impossible anyway since everyone would
> render it differently according to their language background.

Possible, unless there are courses in "correct pronunciation".

> >
> > <ie> [I@] diedan, Diev, dienan - (indicate, thief, serve)
> > Maybe i:@ Just a comment about meaning, diedan-"indicate", not
> > "interpret"? (Maybe depends on context, though...)
>
> Yeah, well, I am not entirely clear on that sound myself yet, also the
> meanings I listed are really just what came to my head first, not a
> definitive meaning. Hmm, also I think I changed the spelling of
> "diedan" to "diudan" in my current language version, I really should
> update that file if people are actually looking at it, heh.
> Well, when I have more time again...

Oh well, it's quite OK, generally, interesting to hear your comments,
thanks for your reply, anyway.

#7994

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 11:30 am
Subject: Re: NEW POLLS - please add your favoured options

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> wakuran_wakaran wrote:
>
> > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Ingmar Roerdinkholder"
> > <ingmar.roerdinkholder@w...> wrote:
> > > No, but a question like "what should Proto Germanic <u:> be in
> > FS? "
> > > is clear enough and much easier than: "what should E <ou>, G <au>,
> > > Dutch <ui>, Danish <u>, Frisian <򦧴;, Low Saxon <uu>, Swedish <u>
> > and
> > > Norw <u> be in FS?". Because that are the results of PG <u:> in
> > the
> > > modern languages, and I suppose everyone knows what is meant. It
> > has
> > > to be a standard, general rule, but not totally without exceptions
> > > that should depend on the real situation in the modern languages.
> > >
> > > Actually, the idea of modernization and simplification of Proto-
> > > Germanic into Folkspr� may not be such a strange idea. I've been
> > > thinking about that lately now and then, because there is so
> > little
> > > unity in our ideas as a group. Maybe the basics of FS could come
> > from
> > > such an approach of PG, extended with things from modern languages
> > >
> > > Ingmar
> > >
> >
> > Isn't that basically the approach of Interlingua and Slovio? At
> > least IL seems to go back to Latin in all cases where no common
> > modern word is found, or a modern has been loaned around in the
> > modern languages.
> >
> How I do things, and am sometimes criticised for it, is I compare only
> cognates among the source languages. That is I don't compare EN dog to
> DE Hund. and come up with a FS word like "hog" or "dond" In that case I
> would compare EN hound to DE Hund.
> I go back to the earliest common ancestral word, in many cases this
will
> be Proto-Germanic. I then change the PG word according to rules that I
> think represent the most typical or common evolution of phonology among
> the source languages. So for example *th becomes t or d in my FS, *hw
> becomes "w" [P], *sk becomes "sch" [S]. Such an approach is to me, not
> just more fun, but it helps when you are dealing with sometime only a
> small sample of words in the source languages, and examining the source
> langs might produce inconclusive or evenly split results.
>
> I consider the form of words and their meaning to be two separate
> things. I take this approach because again and again I find situations
> where cognate words have a subtly or totally different meaning in  the
> source languages. Or a word has a particular meaning but it isn't the
> preferred/obvious meaning in certain languages. Or the word exists but
> is not the preferred word for a concept.



> I think words should sometimes be in FS, even when the meanings of the
> cognates are different. This can often be a subtle difference, such as
> the difference in meaning of English hound and German Hund. Or it is
> often the situation that a word has taken on a different meaning in
just
> one of the source languages. Such as EN ridge, the cognate to words
that
> in other Germlangs mean "back". (What happens if some clever English
> speaker, on seeing the connection of EN bridge to FS brygg decides that
> "rygg" must be the FS word for "ridge")
> Also you can have words like EN write, NL rijten, DE rei�en, SV rita
> that have quite differing meanings in all the source languages. Do you
> decide that there isn't enough common ground for FS to have a word like
> *r�te? And at which level of uncommonality do you decide a word doesn't
> belong in FS? Or you could perhaps with such a group of words, distill
> one common meaning such as "scratch markings onto something"
>
>
>
>
> I believe IL words are the earliest common prototype of cognate words.
> So if all the IL source languages have a cognate word for "hurricane"
> and the earliest common prototype is Spanish, then the IL word is
> *"huracan*".
>

I disagree with your method of *Always* choosing the IL method, even
when it is different from most or all of the other core langs, such as
cirkul instead of cirkel or huracan instead of orkán/orkaan.

> In many cases the earliest common prototype would be Latin, especially
> for graeco-latin internationalisms (ie words coined from latin since
the
> renaissance). But in many other cases the earliest common prototype is
> vulgar latin or romanic or proto-romance or whatever you call it. So
the
> IL word looks like a vulgar latin word.
> Hmmm according to the IL dictionary, it has both "dattilo" and
"dactylo"
> for "date". One looks like a vulgar word, the other looks more like the
> Latin "dactylus"
>
> I don't know how Slovio does things, since it's "source code" is not
> publicly available.
>

Mmmm, some comments and criticism from Wikipedia

----------

     I confirm that it is understandable ... but I do have quite some
experience in listening to Slavic languages. :To me it seems most
similar to the Bulgarian. I would like to have a piece of expert
oppinion on this hypothesis:
     Bulgarian (and some dialects of south Serbia and Macedonian) seems
to have a simplified grammar compared to others, like my own Slovenian
that even has a dual. Was this a consequence of historical events when
the Slavic language was a "patois" ("pigeon English") for other peoples?

     Somewhat distrubing are some un usual endings, like the plural
with "is" which is not Slavic type and the "objective" clause with the
"f" ending.

     From my experience the worst problem in inter-slavic communication
is the different word meaning, even if 80% of roots are the same.
Slovio as a "standard vocabulary" reference may be useful. But the
project is only at a begining. MGTom 00:38, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)

----------

Well, I don't like Slovio one bit, not because of its linguistic value
(though I can't seem to find any elegance or beauty in it), but
because it is a thinly disguised version of Russian and as such the
tool of Pan-Slavism (see the Slovio home page for a bunch of links to
Panslavistic organizations).

There isn't a single phoneme in it that wouldn't be found in Russian,
on the other hand there are no phonemes which occur in other Slavic
languages but not in Russian, such as nasals or palatalized velars.

...

Also, the method of creating a Slavic conlang has been flawed from the
start. Fancy doing a Romance lingua franca if you only know school
French! (pun intended). Yet this seems exactly what Mark Hucko did or
tried to do. You can't dream about creating a historically viable
conlang without going back to Old Church Slavonic and being proficient
with the history of at least four or five Slavic languages, including
Polish, Czech and Serbian/Croatian (since they are the most important
regional representatives). Anything else you may come up with is
either 1) a code of your own devising, 2) a pidgin consisting of a
mutilated version of one of the languages sine flexione.

Silvermane 12:19, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

----------

I don't know how much of this is true, and how much are  personal
opinions. Anyway, the problem of change in meaning applies to
Folkspraak, too, and I think I would generally choose a meaning close
to English or German, when the meaning has diverged a lot in all core
languages.

> If we followed the IL method exactly, many of the FS words would be the
> PG word, with features that most members wouldn't like such as *w *th,
> *hw, *hl, *hr, *bh
>

Certain aspects could be modernized, though, even if following the
method "generally".

> > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't quite see the fascination with PG, if we are going to
> > say
> > > > XYZ
> > > > > in PG will equal PQR in FS, we really don't need to consider
> > > > > including or excluding any of the modern Germanic languages.
> > All
> > > > we
> > > > > have to do is look up the PG word, apply the rules, chop off
> > any
> > > > > awkward case endings, and hey presto our FS word. Therefore
> > > > deciding
> > > > > on any weighting or point scoring is not needed? Maybe it
> > would be
> > > > a
> > > > > quick and easier way of doing things?
> > > >

Reply | Messages in this Topic (82)

#7995

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 11:37 am
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@n...> wrote:
> --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> > Do you know about this one?
> >
> > http://fordsmender.50megs.com/pgmn.html
>
> Yeah I know that one thanks, I also use
>
> http://members.aol.com/rlongman1/protoger.html
>
> As you can see the orthography between the two is different (though
> not to difficult to work out). Also the forms of words given are
> different.
>
> acorn n *akrōnan
> acorn n *akr�naz
>
> I suppose as PG is only a derived language there is no standard form
> or orthography?
>

Probably, but I guess there are at least certain standards that have
evoled among scholars. (Based on the Latin alphabet and IPA, probably)

> > tungol65 wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone know a good source for Proto-Germanic words? I use a
> > > couple of web sites (which use different orthographies) and have
> a few
> > > books with limited content, but want to find a good comprehensive
> > > source.
> > >
> > > Thanks R
> > >

I guess these word lists are good, but although I am not an expert of
Germanic linguistics, they seem somewhat like a mixture of going back
from the modern English word (although that word might not necessarily
have been the most common word in PG) and Gothic word lists, which
isn't necessarily the same thing as PG, itself. =S

Also, they are not particularly exhaustive...

Anyway, just an impression and my 50 cents...

#7996

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 11:45 am
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@w...> wrote:
> --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@n...> wrote:
> > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> > > Do you know about this one?
> > >
> > > http://fordsmender.50megs.com/pgmn.html
> >
> > Yeah I know that one thanks, I also use
> >
> > http://members.aol.com/rlongman1/protoger.html
> >
> > As you can see the orthography between the two is different (though
> > not to difficult to work out). Also the forms of words given are
> > different.
> >
> > acorn n *akrōnan
> > acorn n *akr�naz
> >
> > I suppose as PG is only a derived language there is no standard form
> > or orthography?
> >
>
> Probably, but I guess there are at least certain standards that have
> evoled among scholars. (Based on the Latin alphabet and IPA, probably)
>
> > > tungol65 wrote:
> > >
> > > > Does anyone know a good source for Proto-Germanic words? I use a
> > > > couple of web sites (which use different orthographies) and have
> > a few
> > > > books with limited content, but want to find a good comprehensive
> > > > source.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks R
> > > >
>
> I guess these word lists are good, but although I am not an expert of
> Germanic linguistics, they seem somewhat like a mixture of going back
> from the modern English word (although that word might not necessarily
> have been the most common word in PG) and Gothic word lists, which
> isn't necessarily the same thing as PG, itself. =S
>
> Also, they are not particularly exhaustive...
>
> Anyway, just an impression and my 50 cents...

By the way, you could also check out the Yahoo discussion group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Theudiskon , from an amateur viewpoint,
I'd say the discussions look rather serious, so you could at least
check out the files and links, and try to ask them the same question.
They are quite negative about people deviating from PG-matters,
though, so don't try to get involved in small-talk or something...

#7997

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 12:31 pm
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

tungol65

> I guess these word lists are good, but although I am not an expert of
> Germanic linguistics, they seem somewhat like a mixture of going back
> from the modern English word (although that word might not
necessarily
> have been the most common word in PG) and Gothic word lists, which
> isn't necessarily the same thing as PG, itself. =S
>
> Also, they are not particularly exhaustive...
>
> Anyway, just an impression and my 50 cents...

Exactly right, I want to get a list of PG words, with their supposed
meanings, rather than a list of EN words and their PG roots. I have
two books of IE words, giving their forms in modern languages,
something like those for PG would be good.

R

#7998

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 12:37 pm
Subject: Re: Proto-Germanic

tungol65

> By the way, you could also check out the Yahoo discussion group:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Theudiskon , from an amateur viewpoint,
> I'd say the discussions look rather serious, so you could at least
> check out the files and links, and try to ask them the same question.
> They are quite negative about people deviating from PG-matters,
> though, so don't try to get involved in small-talk or something...

Yeah, I saw that group recently and thought about joining, but it
seemed rather highbrow.

R

#7999

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 12:50 pm
Subject: Some FS basics

tungol65

Here are a list of basic FS rules I culled from poll results, some
might need some further discussion.

1. FS is a mix between a schematic and a naturalistic language,
being both easy to learn and similar to the core languages.

2. There is a distinction between long and short vowels.
(orthography still to be decided!).

3. There are no special consonants other than those in the standard
Latin alphabet.

4. The definite article is "de", for both singular and plural nouns.

5. The indefinite article is "en".

6. plural nouns are formed by adding the suffix "�en" to the
singular noun.

7. There is only an accusative case (direct object) with personal
pronouns.

8. There is a genitive case (possession) formed by adding "-s" to
the nominative case.

9. There is no dative case (indirect object), this is shown by use
of a preposition.

10. A verb should be strong in FS if it is strong in any three or
more branches of the source languages.

11. The future tense is formed by the use of the auxiliary
verb "skall".

12. There is no independent passive form of the verb.

13. The personal pronoun for the first person singular is "ik"
or "ic".

14. The comparative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-er".

15. The superlative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-st"
or "-est" to the adjective.

16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of the
suffix "-lik".

17. The prepositions for "of" and "from" are distinct and separate.

18. The demonstrative pronouns are

EN that, FS dat
EN this, FS dis
EN, those, FS daten
EN these, FS disen
(The use of which form before singular and plural nouns is still
undecided.)

Proto-Germanic

1. PG *w, and *hw both become /v/ written as "v".

Numbers

1. The number one is "en".

2. The number two is "tva" or "tvo".

3. Larger numbers are formed by the pattern "four-and-twenty".

A few points, moving forward.

a. I think we need to decide what preposition to use to show the
dative (indirect object).

b. We need to decide and fix the exact form of the rest of the
numbers.

c. We need to decide on the exact form of the rest of the personal
pronouns.

R

#8000

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 1:02 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@n...> wrote:
> Here are a list of basic FS rules I culled from poll results, some
> might need some further discussion.
>
> 1. FS is a mix between a schematic and a naturalistic language,
> being both easy to learn and similar to the core languages.
>
> 2. There is a distinction between long and short vowels.
> (orthography still to be decided!).
>
> 3. There are no special consonants other than those in the standard
> Latin alphabet.
>
> 4. The definite article is "de", for both singular and plural nouns.
>
> 5. The indefinite article is "en".
>
> 6. plural nouns are formed by adding the suffix "�en" to the
> singular noun.
>
> 7. There is only an accusative case (direct object) with personal
> pronouns.
>
> 8. There is a genitive case (possession) formed by adding "-s" to
> the nominative case.
>
> 9. There is no dative case (indirect object), this is shown by use
> of a preposition.
>
> 10. A verb should be strong in FS if it is strong in any three or
> more branches of the source languages.
>
> 11. The future tense is formed by the use of the auxiliary
> verb "skall".
>
> 12. There is no independent passive form of the verb.
>
> 13. The personal pronoun for the first person singular is "ik"
> or "ic".
>
> 14. The comparative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-er".
>
> 15. The superlative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-st"
> or "-est" to the adjective.
>
> 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of the
> suffix "-lik".
>
> 17. The prepositions for "of" and "from" are distinct and separate.
>
> 18. The demonstrative pronouns are
>
> EN that, FS dat
> EN this, FS dis
> EN, those, FS daten
> EN these, FS disen
> (The use of which form before singular and plural nouns is still
> undecided.)
>
> Proto-Germanic
>
> 1. PG *w, and *hw both become /v/ written as "v".
>
> Numbers
>
> 1. The number one is "en".
>
> 2. The number two is "tva" or "tvo".
>
> 3. Larger numbers are formed by the pattern "four-and-twenty".
>
> A few points, moving forward.
>
> a. I think we need to decide what preposition to use to show the
> dative (indirect object).
>
> b. We need to decide and fix the exact form of the rest of the
> numbers.
>
> c. We need to decide on the exact form of the rest of the personal
> pronouns.
>
> R

Hmmm, I disagree about many of these results, my excuse is that I
haven't written any "official" texts, yet... @_@

#8001

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 1:32 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

tungol65

> Hmmm, I disagree about many of these results, my excuse is that I
> haven't written any "official" texts, yet... @_@

That's cool, there I some I also disagree with. I see no problem with
revisiting some of these, a lot of the voters, don't seem to be active
anymore, unless they are lurking in the background. The point is there
is still a lot of basic stuff undecided.

R

#8002

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 1:42 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

parked71

tungol65 wrote:

> Here are a list of basic FS rules I culled from poll results, some
> might need some further discussion.
>
> 1. FS is a mix between a schematic and a naturalistic language,
> being both easy to learn and similar to the core languages.
>
> 2. There is a distinction between long and short vowels.
> (orthography still to be decided!).
>
> 3. There are no special consonants other than those in the standard
> Latin alphabet.
>
> 4. The definite article is "de", for both singular and plural nouns.
>
> 5. The indefinite article is "en".

Part of me thinks it should be the same as the word for "one", whatever
that might be (�n, een, en, ein, ain).
The other part of me thinks having a distinction is good because, for
one thing the indefinite article is rarely stressed. Since the
indefinite article is such a common word it might save some effort to
not have to spell it with an accented vowel. Also dutch when necesary to
make the distinction uses een/��n. So we could have "�n" for one and
"en" for a/an.

>
> 6. plural nouns are formed by adding the suffix "�en" to the
> singular noun.
>
> 7. There is only an accusative case (direct object) with personal
> pronouns.
>
> 8. There is a genitive case (possession) formed by adding "-s" to
> the nominative case.
>
> 9. There is no dative case (indirect object), this is shown by use
> of a preposition.
>
> 10. A verb should be strong in FS if it is strong in any three or
> more branches of the source languages.

I would say if you average the results of this poll (or a preferential
voting system had been used) you get that the verb has to be strong in
all 4 branches of the source languages. So if cognate verbs are strong
in ALL the source languages, the verb should be strong in FS. This would
keep the numbers nice and low and provide a naturalistic result which
would be reflective of the source languages.


>
> 11. The future tense is formed by the use of the auxiliary
> verb "skall".
>
> 12. There is no independent passive form of the verb.
>
> 13. The personal pronoun for the first person singular is "ik"or "ic".

Yes, but what about the objective case? me/mig/mich/mij/mir/meg

>
> 14. The comparative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-er".
>
> 15. The superlative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-st"
> or "-est" to the adjective.
>
> 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of the
> suffix "-lik".
>
> 17. The prepositions for "of" and "from" are distinct and separate.
>
> 18. The demonstrative pronouns are
>
> EN that, FS dat
> EN this, FS dis
> EN, those, FS daten
> EN these, FS disen
> (The use of which form before singular and plural nouns is still
> undecided.)
>
> Proto-Germanic

Also:

The perfect tense is not formed with a "ge-" prefix.

The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the situation as
to voicing in English and Scandinavian.

Infinitive verbs are formed <stem>+en - singen finden haven

Present verbs are formed <stem> - ik sing ik find ik hav

Singular and Plural the same. ik sing/wi sing hi sing/d� sing du sing/ji
sing etc

Past tense are formed <stem>+(e)de - ik singde ik findede ik havde
(Great choice of example verbs since in every case I would have them
strong or irregular)

Present participle formed <stem>+end - de singend Mann, de slapend Volf




>
> 1. PG *w, and *hw both become /v/ written as "v".
>
I think if we re-held this poll today we might get a result more in
favour of "w" as the orthography. Roly seems to have changed his
practise to "w".

> Numbers
>
> 1. The number one is "en".
>
> 2. The number two is "tva" or "tvo".
>
> 3. Larger numbers are formed by the pattern "four-and-twenty".
>
> A few points, moving forward.
>
> a. I think we need to decide what preposition to use to show the
> dative (indirect object).
>
> b. We need to decide and fix the exact form of the rest of the
> numbers.
>
> c. We need to decide on the exact form of the rest of the personal
> pronouns.
>
> R
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Browse the draft word lists!
> http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
>
> Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> English second language
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+l\
anguage&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig\
=CBIz1NU5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
>  Second language acquisition
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+seco\
nd+language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&\
.sig=HEDaJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
>  Second language learning
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+\
language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.si\
g=gTURDLHJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "folkspraak
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

#8003

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 2:03 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> tungol65 wrote:
>
> > Here are a list of basic FS rules I culled from poll results, some
> > might need some further discussion.
> >
> > 1. FS is a mix between a schematic and a naturalistic language,
> > being both easy to learn and similar to the core languages.
> >
> > 2. There is a distinction between long and short vowels.
> > (orthography still to be decided!).
> >
> > 3. There are no special consonants other than those in the standard
> > Latin alphabet.
> >
> > 4. The definite article is "de", for both singular and plural nouns.
> >
> > 5. The indefinite article is "en".
>
> Part of me thinks it should be the same as the word for "one", whatever
> that might be (�n, een, en, ein, ain).
> The other part of me thinks having a distinction is good because, for
> one thing the indefinite article is rarely stressed. Since the
> indefinite article is such a common word it might save some effort to
> not have to spell it with an accented vowel. Also dutch when
necesary to
> make the distinction uses een/��n. So we could have "�n" for one and
> "en" for a/an.
>
> >
> > 6. plural nouns are formed by adding the suffix "�en" to the
> > singular noun.
> >
> > 7. There is only an accusative case (direct object) with personal
> > pronouns.
> >
> > 8. There is a genitive case (possession) formed by adding "-s" to
> > the nominative case.
> >
> > 9. There is no dative case (indirect object), this is shown by use
> > of a preposition.
> >
> > 10. A verb should be strong in FS if it is strong in any three or
> > more branches of the source languages.
>
> I would say if you average the results of this poll (or a preferential
> voting system had been used) you get that the verb has to be strong in
> all 4 branches of the source languages. So if cognate verbs are strong
> in ALL the source languages, the verb should be strong in FS. This
would
> keep the numbers nice and low and provide a naturalistic result which
> would be reflective of the source languages.
>
>
> >
> > 11. The future tense is formed by the use of the auxiliary
> > verb "skall".
> >
> > 12. There is no independent passive form of the verb.
> >
> > 13. The personal pronoun for the first person singular is "ik"or "ic".
>
> Yes, but what about the objective case? me/mig/mich/mij/mir/meg
>
> >
> > 14. The comparative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-er".
> >
> > 15. The superlative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-st"
> > or "-est" to the adjective.
> >
> > 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of the
> > suffix "-lik".
> >

I don't like this, too English, and not necessarily logical. If we
need a special adverb form, I think we should have the suffix wîs/wais.


> > 17. The prepositions for "of" and "from" are distinct and separate.
> >
> > 18. The demonstrative pronouns are
> >
> > EN that, FS dat
> > EN this, FS dis
> > EN, those, FS daten
> > EN these, FS disen
> > (The use of which form before singular and plural nouns is still
> > undecided.)
> >
> > Proto-Germanic
>
> Also:
>
> The perfect tense is not formed with a "ge-" prefix.
>
> The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
> respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the situation as
> to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
>

Uhmmm, I disagree about this, I think it would be better if it was dh
in all cases. You convinced me, earlier...

> Infinitive verbs are formed <stem>+en - singen finden haven
>
> Present verbs are formed <stem> - ik sing ik find ik hav
>
> Singular and Plural the same. ik sing/wi sing hi sing/d� sing du
sing/ji
> sing etc
>
> Past tense are formed <stem>+(e)de - ik singde ik findede ik havde
> (Great choice of example verbs since in every case I would have them
> strong or irregular)
>
> Present participle formed <stem>+end - de singend Mann, de slapend Volf
>
>
>
>
> >
> > 1. PG *w, and *hw both become /v/ written as "v".
> >
> I think if we re-held this poll today we might get a result more in
> favour of "w" as the orthography. Roly seems to have changed his
> practise to "w".
>
> > Numbers
> >
> > 1. The number one is "en".
> >
> > 2. The number two is "tva" or "tvo".
> >
> > 3. Larger numbers are formed by the pattern "four-and-twenty".
> >
> > A few points, moving forward.
> >
> > a. I think we need to decide what preposition to use to show the
> > dative (indirect object).
> >
> > b. We need to decide and fix the exact form of the rest of the
> > numbers.
> >
> > c. We need to decide on the exact form of the rest of the personal
> > pronouns.
> >
> > R
> >

#8004

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

tungol65

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> tungol65 wrote:
>
> > Here are a list of basic FS rules I culled from poll results,
some
> > might need some further discussion.
> >
> > 1. FS is a mix between a schematic and a naturalistic language,
> > being both easy to learn and similar to the core languages.
> >
> > 2. There is a distinction between long and short vowels.
> > (orthography still to be decided!).
> >
> > 3. There are no special consonants other than those in the
standard
> > Latin alphabet.
> >
> > 4. The definite article is "de", for both singular and plural
nouns.
> >
> > 5. The indefinite article is "en".
>
> Part of me thinks it should be the same as the word for "one",
whatever
> that might be (�n, een, en, ein, ain).
> The other part of me thinks having a distinction is good because,
for
> one thing the indefinite article is rarely stressed. Since the
> indefinite article is such a common word it might save some effort
to
> not have to spell it with an accented vowel. Also dutch when
necesary to
> make the distinction uses een/��n. So we could have "�n" for one
and
> "en" for a/an.

I agree, depends on finally resolving the orthography issue. I'm
swinging away from marking vovels for length (OK for quality) and
moving back to a vowel doubling for long or consonant doubling for
short. So "enn" or "en" for a/an and "en" or "een" for one,
depending on the system used.

> > 6. plural nouns are formed by adding the suffix "�en" to the
> > singular noun.
> >
> > 7. There is only an accusative case (direct object) with personal
> > pronouns.
> >
> > 8. There is a genitive case (possession) formed by adding "-s" to
> > the nominative case.
> >
> > 9. There is no dative case (indirect object), this is shown by
use
> > of a preposition.
> >
> > 10. A verb should be strong in FS if it is strong in any three or
> > more branches of the source languages.
>
> I would say if you average the results of this poll (or a
preferential
> voting system had been used) you get that the verb has to be
strong in
> all 4 branches of the source languages. So if cognate verbs are
strong
> in ALL the source languages, the verb should be strong in FS. This
would
> keep the numbers nice and low and provide a naturalistic result
which
> would be reflective of the source languages.
>
>
> >
> > 11. The future tense is formed by the use of the auxiliary
> > verb "skall".
> >
> > 12. There is no independent passive form of the verb.
> >
> > 13. The personal pronoun for the first person singular
is "ik"or "ic".
>
> Yes, but what about the objective case? me/mig/mich/mij/mir/meg

Yes, I'd like to develop a poll to cover all the personal pronouns.

> > 14. The comparative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-
er".
> >
> > 15. The superlative adjective is formed by adding the suffix "-
st"
> > or "-est" to the adjective.
> >
> > 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of the
> > suffix "-lik".
> >
> > 17. The prepositions for "of" and "from" are distinct and
separate.
> >
> > 18. The demonstrative pronouns are
> >
> > EN that, FS dat
> > EN this, FS dis
> > EN, those, FS daten
> > EN these, FS disen
> > (The use of which form before singular and plural nouns is still
> > undecided.)
> >
> > Proto-Germanic
>
> Also:
>
> The perfect tense is not formed with a "ge-" prefix.
>
> The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
> respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the
situation as
> to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
>
> Infinitive verbs are formed <stem>+en - singen finden haven
>
> Present verbs are formed <stem> - ik sing ik find ik hav
>
> Singular and Plural the same. ik sing/wi sing hi sing/d� sing du
sing/ji
> sing etc
>
> Past tense are formed <stem>+(e)de - ik singde ik findede ik havde
> (Great choice of example verbs since in every case I would have
them
> strong or irregular)
>
> Present participle formed <stem>+end - de singend Mann, de slapend
Volf

Yes, I overlooked those.

> > 1. PG *w, and *hw both become /v/ written as "v".
> >
> I think if we re-held this poll today we might get a result more
in
> favour of "w" as the orthography. Roly seems to have changed his
> practise to "w".

Same I've moved back to "w", as I think it aids recognition (well to
non-scandies anyway)

> > Numbers
> >
> > 1. The number one is "en".
> >
> > 2. The number two is "tva" or "tvo".
> >
> > 3. Larger numbers are formed by the pattern "four-and-twenty".
> >
> > A few points, moving forward.
> >
> > a. I think we need to decide what preposition to use to show the
> > dative (indirect object).
> >
> > b. We need to decide and fix the exact form of the rest of the
> > numbers.
> >
> > c. We need to decide on the exact form of the rest of the
personal
> > pronouns.
> >
> > R
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Browse the draft word lists!
> > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
> >
> > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > English second language
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+l
anguage+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=CBIz1NU
5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
> >  Second language acquisition
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+second+language&w2=Seco
nd+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=HED
aJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
> >  Second language learning
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+
language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=gTURDL
HJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >     * Visit your group "folkspraak
> >       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
> >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
subject=Unsubscribe>
> >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> >

#8005

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 2:31 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

tungol65

> > > 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of
the
> > > suffix "-lik".
> > >
>
> I don't like this, too English, and not necessarily logical. If we
> need a special adverb form, I think we should have the suffix
wîs/wais.

I agree (see below), I'm happy for the adjective and adverb to have
the same form, "snel" say for both quick and quickly. I'd make a few
exceptions like in "good" and "well", for example. The "-wis" or "-
wais" suffix would be good, for forming adverbs from nouns.

> > The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
> > respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the
situation as
> > to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
> >
>
> Uhmmm, I disagree about this, I think it would be better if it was
dh
> in all cases. You convinced me, earlier...

I think we need to abide by poll results whether we agree or not. I
can't see the point in joining a group, if you don't go with the
majority choice. Yes debate it and try to convince others, but if
the poll doesn't go your way, accept it and move on. Otherwise well
just keep going around in circles.

However I would say revision is good, and I'm not totally opposed to
re-polling on a topic. Perhaps if someone wants something re-polled
upon and they get the support of enough members it can be done.

As a FS ground rule "grundregel" we could say if a proposal for a re-
poll has the support of at least 5 members it can be done?

#8006

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 2:51 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@n...> wrote:
> > > > 16. Adverbs can be formed from adjectives by the addition of
> the
> > > > suffix "-lik".
> > > >
> >
> > I don't like this, too English, and not necessarily logical. If we
> > need a special adverb form, I think we should have the suffix
> wîs/wais.
>
> I agree (see below), I'm happy for the adjective and adverb to have
> the same form, "snel" say for both quick and quickly. I'd make a few
> exceptions like in "good" and "well", for example. The "-wis" or "-
> wais" suffix would be good, for forming adverbs from nouns.
>
> > > The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
> > > respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the
> situation as
> > > to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
> > >
> >
> > Uhmmm, I disagree about this, I think it would be better if it was
> dh
> > in all cases. You convinced me, earlier...
>
> I think we need to abide by poll results whether we agree or not. I
> can't see the point in joining a group, if you don't go with the
> majority choice. Yes debate it and try to convince others, but if
> the poll doesn't go your way, accept it and move on. Otherwise well
> just keep going around in circles.
>
> However I would say revision is good, and I'm not totally opposed to
> re-polling on a topic. Perhaps if someone wants something re-polled
> upon and they get the support of enough members it can be done.
>
> As a FS ground rule "grundregel" we could say if a proposal for a re-
> poll has the support of at least 5 members it can be done?

Hmmm, I guess it's okay...
Maybe I am too lazy to abide, though and I should look some more for
good vocabulary, instead...

#8007

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 3:03 pm
Subject: Preference Voting

tungol65

I've thought of a way we could have preference voting within the
limitations of the Yahoo polling system.

Say a proposal has 4 choices (A,B,C,D), and you have a first and
second preference vote. You could layout the poll questions as
follows

1. Choice A as 1st preference.
2. Choice A as 2nd preference.
3. Choice B as 1st preference.
4. Choice B as 2nd preference.
5. Choice C as 1st preference.
6. Choice C as 2nd preference.
7. Choice D as 1st preference.
8. Choice D as 2nd preference.

Say 8 members voted, all their first choice votes count as 2 points,
all the second choice votes count as 1 point.

A. gets three 1st and one 2nd = 7 points
B. gets one 1st and two 2nd = 4 points
C. gets three 1st and two 2nd = 8 points
D. gets one 1st and three 2nd = 5 points

So proposal C wins. What do you think?

R

#8008

From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat Oct 1, 2005 5:45 pm
Subject: New file uploaded to folkspraak

folkspraak@yahoogroups.com

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the folkspraak
group.

   File        : /Poll proposals/Tungol65's Number Proposals.doc
   Uploaded by : tungol65 <rdw.young@...>
   Description : I think we should decide what the FS numerals should be, here
are my proposals. I hope if we have enough choices to create a poll in two
weeks.

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak/files/Poll%20proposals/Tungol65%27s%20N\
umber%20Proposals.doc

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

tungol65 <rdw.young@...>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (755)

#8009

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 3:12 am
Subject: Re: New file uploaded to folkspraak

parked71

*Tungol65’s Number Poll Proposals*


Here are my comments




   *Cardinal Numbers*



en /e:n/                   already well established

Ok once we establish the pronunciation of PG *ai (what I call the "ê"
meta vowel)
I my dialect I use "ên" pronounced either [e:n] or [eIn] depending on
preference.



twai /tvaI/              based on PG *twai, as no clear choice of what
vowel to use.

                                 [EN two, GE zwei, NL twee, WF , SV två,
DN to, NO to]

Aye, this is a tricky one. I would be inclined to go with "twê" as this
follows the regular relationship between english "o", NL "ee" and DE "ei".
On the other hand German also has "zwoh" as an alternative form (used in
radio communication to avoid confusion with "drei". Also Swedish has
both "två" and "tu". And English has "twain" (rather archaic admittedly).
So I think we could potentially allow TWO versions of this number: "twê"
and "two" and leave it to speaker preference.



tre /tre:/                  PG “th” becomes “t” as per poll decision.
“e” is long.

                                 [EN three, GE drei, NL drie, WF trije,
SV tre, DN tre, NO tre]

No sure myself it should be "tri" or "tre" or perhaps even "trî"

fier /fi:6/                 [EN four, GE vier, NL vier, WF fjouwer, SV
fyre, DN fire, NO fire]

OK but maybe "fiur" although that could end up being a homonym with "fire"

fimf /fImf/               preserves PG nasal retained in GE, SV, DN &
NO. Vowel should be short, only long in Ingveaonic due to loss of nasal.

[EN five, GE fünf, NL vijf, WF fiif, SV fem, DN fem, NO fem]

In cases like this when things are quite evenly split, I tend to go for
the English-like form. So I would have Ingvaenonic"fîv"



seks /seks/            [EN six, GE sechs, NL zes, WF seis, SV sex, DN
seks, NO seks]

Yes but spell it as "sex" because it's more amusing. Seriosly with [ks],
I normally use a "x" because that's what the letter is there for. It
looks nicer to me than "ks". We only have a limited palette of letters
in the Roman alphabet, so it makes sense to me to use them all.



seven /se:v@n/    [EN seven, GE sieben, NL zeven, WF sawn/saun, SV sju,
DN syv, NO sju]

Good but is debatable about whether to have the final "n". Remember
Dutch rarely pronouns all those final ns.



acht /a:xt/               retains PG /x/.

[EN eight, GE acht, NL acht, WF acht, SV åtta, DN otte, NO åtte]

Agreed


nien /nI@n/           PG *niwun.  [EN nine, GE neun, NL negen, WF
njuggen, SV nio, DN ni, NO ni]

I would use "niun" here, but I see that you prono "ie" as dipthong.



ten /te:n                 long vowel.

[EN ten, GE zehn, NL tien, WF tsien, SV tio, DN ti, NO ti]

I would make it "tejn" pronounced [teIn] assuming we have that phoneme
available. I put the "j" in there as a marker of the lost velar
consonant that the old germanic languages had in that place. from PG
*tehan from PIE *dekm.



elf /elf/                    [EN eleven, GE elf, NL elf, WF *â**lf/**
â**lve*, SV elva, DN elleve, NO elleve]

Agreed except maybe "elv"



twolv /tOlv/           [EN twelve, GE zwölf, NL twaalf, WF toalve/toalf,
SV tolv, DN tolv, NO tolv]

Quite common pattern among the Germlangs is *-we- becoming  *u. As in
"sister" and "come"
So maybe "tulv" would be OK. I still favour "twelv"



13-19       treten, fierten, fimften, seksten, seventen, achtten, nienten
So the "teen" suffix is exactly the same as the word for 10.



20–90      twaintig, tretig, fiertig, fimftig, sekstig, seventig,
achtting, nientig



24, 35      fier-ond-twaintig, fimf-ond-tretig



hunderd /hUnde:6d/    [EN hundred, GE hundert, NL honderd, WF hûndert,
SV hundra, DN hundrede, NO hundre]



200,300   twai hunderd, tre hunderd ….etc.



tusend /tu:s@nd/                                 PG *thusundi, PG “th”
should be unvoiced and the “u” long.

                                                 [EN thousand, GE
tausend, NL duizend, WF tûzen, SV tusen, DN tusind, NO tusen]

For the long u, I would have the û meta vowel here. This is descended
from PG long u. Once it is decided what the general prono of this vowel
is, we can apply it to this word.

  So it might be pronounced as "taUs@nd" or "tu:z@nd or something.



10,000     ten tusend,            100,000   hunderd
tusend                    1,000,000 miljon /mIljo:n/

EN million DE Million NL miljoen, *WF miljoen, *DA million, SV miljon,
NO million
We are somewhat split here between the languages the stick a j in their
million and thoses that don't But the two biggest languages are in
agreement here. I see no point in changing the spelling of "million"
from the more common international "million". FS will likely have lots
of "-ion" words and IMHO we should spell them with "-ion" not "-jon".


Also we need to decide what to do once we reach 10^9. Do we call it a
"milliard" or a "billion"? Also 10^12. Is this a "trillion" or a
"billion"? How do the source languages do this? In English, we normally
say 10^9 = billion and 10^12 = trillion. But we still sometimes get some
pedantic and old-fashioned types who say "you're wrong, a billion is a
million times a million, your doing it the american way..."

Reply | Messages in this Topic (755)

#8010

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 9:21 am
Subject: Re: Preference Voting

parked71

Yes that would work in theory. You could probably extend it to 3rd or
4th choice also but of course you soon run into the restriction in the
number of options available in one poll.

It's also not a fool proof way of doing things as there is no way to
stop a voter (accidentally or deliberately) voting both 1st and 2nd
preference for option A. Or voting 2 first preferences, one on Choice A
and one on Choice B.

  It also would be very hard to interpret the result, even if  everyone
votes correctly to the spirit of the PV system. You would only be able
to rely on Yahoo to collect the votes, not to display the result.
Somebody else would need to tally the results and calculate them and
display them somehow.

tungol65 wrote:

> I've thought of a way we could have preference voting within the
> limitations of the Yahoo polling system.
>
> Say a proposal has 4 choices (A,B,C,D), and you have a first and
> second preference vote. You could layout the poll questions as
> follows
>
> 1. Choice A as 1st preference.
> 2. Choice A as 2nd preference.
> 3. Choice B as 1st preference.
> 4. Choice B as 2nd preference.
> 5. Choice C as 1st preference.
> 6. Choice C as 2nd preference.
> 7. Choice D as 1st preference.
> 8. Choice D as 2nd preference.
>
> Say 8 members voted, all their first choice votes count as 2 points,
> all the second choice votes count as 1 point.
>
> A. gets three 1st and one 2nd = 7 points
> B. gets one 1st and two 2nd = 4 points
> C. gets three 1st and two 2nd = 8 points
> D. gets one 1st and three 2nd = 5 points
>
> So proposal C wins. What do you think?
>
> R
>
>
>
>
> Browse the draft word lists!
> http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
>
> Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> English second language
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+l\
anguage&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig\
=CBIz1NU5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
>  Second language acquisition
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+seco\
nd+language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&\
.sig=HEDaJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
>  Second language learning
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+\
language&w2=Second+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.si\
g=gTURDLHJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
>
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

#8011

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 9:34 am
Subject: Re: Re: Some FS basics

parked71

> The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"

> > respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the situation as
> > to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
> >
>
> Uhmmm, I disagree about this, I think it would be better if it was dh
> in all cases. You convinced me, earlier...
>
*Change view to UTF-8 in your browser or email client to read this post
correctly.


Also I think marking *th would also be of just as much help to German
and Dutch speakers as to English Speakers. *
Why? In German and Dutch *th in almost every case always becomes "d"
[d]. (denken, danken, Draht/draad, bedeute/beduiden, der/de das/dat, doch)
If we do in FS, what most of the members seem to be doing and split *th
into BOTH [t] (tenke, tanke, trâd betiude etc) and [d] (de, dat, dœch,
etc), this would be the cause of confusion for German and Dutch
speakers. Especially probably for German speakers, since they also have
the High German consonant shift to contend with. So a "t" in FS could
potentially be represented in a german cognate by "d" or "z" or "t". And
a "d" in FS could correspond to German "d" or "t". If we were to mark
voiced *th as, for example "đ" (crossed d) and unvoiced *th as "ŧ"
(crossed t), then the relationship to High German, English, Dutch and
Scandinavian becomes very easy to decode: "ŧ" = EN th, NL d, DE d,
Scandy t. "đ" = EN th, NL d, DE d, Scandy d.
I realise this will only work for written FS. Without a different prono
for Đ vs D and Ŧ vs T, it will be of little use for spoken FS. But I
think initially FS will be more important as a written language. Marking
etymology will serve as a study and learning aid, that will allow
speakers of various germlangs to de-code FS, with almost no training. FS
can be taught to novices in two ways simultaneously. Firstly students
can be taught it like any other foreign language, first learning such
things as greetings, numbers and phrases such as "Ik hêt..." and "Wâr is
đe toilett?". But at the same time they can be taught how to de-code FS
words that they don't recognise into cognate words in their own
language, so they can guess their way through unfamiliar FS language
situations.

#8012

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 9:40 am
Subject: Re: Preference Voting

tungol65

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> Yes that would work in theory. You could probably extend it to 3rd
or
> 4th choice also but of course you soon run into the restriction in
the
> number of options available in one poll.
>
> It's also not a fool proof way of doing things as there is no way
to
> stop a voter (accidentally or deliberately) voting both 1st and
2nd
> preference for option A. Or voting 2 first preferences, one on
Choice A
> and one on Choice B.

It would be up to the creator of the poll to monitor that, with a
friendly post point out their error. If they don't change it by the
time the poll closes, their votes will be null and void.

>  It also would be very hard to interpret the result, even if
everyone
> votes correctly to the spirit of the PV system. You would only be
able
> to rely on Yahoo to collect the votes, not to display the result.
> Somebody else would need to tally the results and calculate them
and
> display them somehow.

Shouldn't be to difficult, I created a spreadsheet for the example.
The final result could be uploaded in the form of a spreadsheet.

> tungol65 wrote:
>
> > I've thought of a way we could have preference voting within the
> > limitations of the Yahoo polling system.
> >
> > Say a proposal has 4 choices (A,B,C,D), and you have a first and
> > second preference vote. You could layout the poll questions as
> > follows
> >
> > 1. Choice A as 1st preference.
> > 2. Choice A as 2nd preference.
> > 3. Choice B as 1st preference.
> > 4. Choice B as 2nd preference.
> > 5. Choice C as 1st preference.
> > 6. Choice C as 2nd preference.
> > 7. Choice D as 1st preference.
> > 8. Choice D as 2nd preference.
> >
> > Say 8 members voted, all their first choice votes count as 2
points,
> > all the second choice votes count as 1 point.
> >
> > A. gets three 1st and one 2nd = 7 points
> > B. gets one 1st and two 2nd = 4 points
> > C. gets three 1st and two 2nd = 8 points
> > D. gets one 1st and three 2nd = 5 points
> >
> > So proposal C wins. What do you think?
> >
> > R
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Browse the draft word lists!
> > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
> >
> > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > English second language
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+l
anguage+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=CBIz1NU
5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
> >  Second language acquisition
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+second+language&w2=Seco
nd+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=HED
aJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
> >  Second language learning
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+
language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=gTURDL
HJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
> >       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
> >
> >     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> >     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> >

#8013

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 10:00 am
Subject: Re: Re: Preference Voting

parked71

tungol65 wrote:

> --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
> > Yes that would work in theory. You could probably extend it to 3rd
> or
> > 4th choice also but of course you soon run into the restriction in
> the
> > number of options available in one poll.
> >
> > It's also not a fool proof way of doing things as there is no way
> to
> > stop a voter (accidentally or deliberately) voting both 1st and
> 2nd
> > preference for option A. Or voting 2 first preferences, one on
> Choice A
> > and one on Choice B.
>
> It would be up to the creator of the poll to monitor that, with a
> friendly post point out their error. If they don't change it by the
> time the poll closes, their votes will be null and void.
>
> >  It also would be very hard to interpret the result, even if
> everyone
> > votes correctly to the spirit of the PV system. You would only be
> able
> > to rely on Yahoo to collect the votes, not to display the result.
> > Somebody else would need to tally the results and calculate them
> and
> > display them somehow.
>
> Shouldn't be to difficult, I created a spreadsheet for the example.
> The final result could be uploaded in the form of a spreadsheet.
>

OK so in theory it could work, assuming everybody is honest and open.
Maybe we could trial it with something of little consequence such as the
Flag question.


> > tungol65 wrote:
> >
> > > I've thought of a way we could have preference voting within the
> > > limitations of the Yahoo polling system.
> > >
> > > Say a proposal has 4 choices (A,B,C,D), and you have a first and
> > > second preference vote. You could layout the poll questions as
> > > follows
> > >
> > > 1. Choice A as 1st preference.
> > > 2. Choice A as 2nd preference.
> > > 3. Choice B as 1st preference.
> > > 4. Choice B as 2nd preference.
> > > 5. Choice C as 1st preference.
> > > 6. Choice C as 2nd preference.
> > > 7. Choice D as 1st preference.
> > > 8. Choice D as 2nd preference.
> > >
> > > Say 8 members voted, all their first choice votes count as 2
> points,
> > > all the second choice votes count as 1 point.
> > >
> > > A. gets three 1st and one 2nd = 7 points
> > > B. gets one 1st and two 2nd = 4 points
> > > C. gets three 1st and two 2nd = 8 points
> > > D. gets one 1st and three 2nd = 5 points
> > >
> > > So proposal C wins. What do you think?
> > >
> > > R
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Browse the draft word lists!
> > > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> > > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
> > >
> > > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> > > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > SPONSORED LINKS
> > > English second language
> > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
> t=ms&k=English+second+language&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+l
> anguage+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=CBIz1NU
> 5O8EnnUO5DjY8kg>
> > >       Second language acquisition
> > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
> t=ms&k=Second+language+acquisition&w1=English+second+language&w2=Seco
> nd+language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=HED
> aJJSJwlPEzqPxZTLqfA>
> > >       Second language learning
> > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
> t=ms&k=Second+language+learning&w1=English+second+language&w2=Second+
> language+acquisition&w3=Second+language+learning&c=3&s=92&.sig=gTURDL
> HJnqmE63Jf3NGR_w>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > >     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
> > >       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
> > >
> > >     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
> subject=Unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
> of
> > >       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> > >
>
>
>
>
> Browse the draft word lists!
> http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
>
> Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     *  Visit your group "folkspraak
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
>
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

#8014

From: "tungol65" <rdw.young@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 11:33 am
Subject: Utlegging fon stemspraken-poll resultaten

tungol65

Here is my interpretation of the poll results about what languages
(stemspraken?) to use in Folkspraak and how they are weighted.

Languages to be considered when creating Folkspraak

* Standard English (including Scots)
* Standard High German (including Schwiizert��tsch, Alemannic,
Bavarian all other High German dialects)
* Low German and Low Saxon (Plattdeutsch & Niedersachsisch)
* Standard Dutch (Nederlands) (including Afrikaans)
* West Frisian
* Danish
* Swedish
* Norwegian (Nynorsk)
* Icelandic
* Interlingua (only in tie-break situations and internationalisms)
* Slovio (only in tie-break situations and internationalisms)

Dialect words can only be used, where the meaning is well known
(e.g. English "bairn")
Archaic words can only be used, where the meaning is well known
(e.g. English "thou")

Languages not to be considered when creating Folkspraak

* Yiddish
* North Frisian
* Norwegian (Bokmal)
* Faroese

Languages with no clear decision

* Gothic

Weighting & Points

The weighting should be by graduations (the lowest gets 1 point, the
next highest gets 2 points and so on). Number of speakers (primary)
data from Wikipedia.

(9 points) English (380,000,000)
(8 points) German (95,000,000)
(7 points) Dutch (30,000,000)1
(6 points) Plattdeutsch (10,000,000)2
(5 points) Swedish (9,300,000)
(4 points) Danish (5,500,000)
(3 points) Nynorsk (690,000)3
(2 points) West Frisian (530,000)4
(1 point) Icelandic (300,000)


Notes
1. Including Afrikaans.
2. Figure from Ethnologue.com (number who understand the language).
3. Mean of 360,000 � 700,000 estimate.
4. 10%-15% of total of 4,600,000 Norwegian Speakers.

R

Reply | Messages in this Topic (31)

#8015

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: New file uploaded to folkspraak

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
>
>   *Tungol65’s Number Poll Proposals*
>
>
> Here are my comments
>
>
>
>
>   *Cardinal Numbers*
>
>
>
> en /e:n/                   already well established
>
> Ok once we establish the pronunciation of PG *ai (what I call
the "ê"
> meta vowel)
> I my dialect I use "ên" pronounced either [e:n] or [eIn] depending
on
> preference.
>
>
>
> twai /tvaI/              based on PG *twai, as no clear choice of
what
> vowel to use.
>
>                                 [EN two, GE zwei, NL twee, WF , SV
två,
> DN to, NO to]
>
> Aye, this is a tricky one. I would be inclined to go with "twê" as
this
> follows the regular relationship between english "o", NL "ee" and
DE "ei".
> On the other hand German also has "zwoh" as an alternative form
(used in
> radio communication to avoid confusion with "drei". Also Swedish
has
> both "två" and "tu". And English has "twain" (rather archaic
admittedly).
> So I think we could potentially allow TWO versions of this
number: "twê"
> and "two" and leave it to speaker preference.
>

Possibly, also Swedish has tve- in certain compounds such as tve-
eggat svärd (two-edged sword)

>
>
> tre /tre:/                  PG “th” becomes “t” as per poll
decision.
> “e” is long.
>
>                                 [EN three, GE drei, NL drie, WF
trije,
> SV tre, DN tre, NO tre]
>
> No sure myself it should be "tri" or "tre" or perhaps even "trî"
>
> fier /fi:6/                 [EN four, GE vier, NL vier, WF
fjouwer, SV
> fyre, DN fire, NO fire]
>
> OK but maybe "fiur" although that could end up being a homonym
with "fire"

This is what has happened in Swedish, basically, "fyr" for "fire",
and "fyra" for "four".

>
> fimf /fImf/               preserves PG nasal retained in GE, SV,
DN &
> NO. Vowel should be short, only long in Ingveaonic due to loss of
nasal.
>
> [EN five, GE fünf, NL vijf, WF fiif, SV fem, DN fem, NO fem]
>
> In cases like this when things are quite evenly split, I tend to
go for
> the English-like form. So I would have Ingvaenonic"fîv"
>
>

Uhmm, similar to En and Nl, actually, it seems that the m in
Scandinavian doesn't come from the nasal, actually, but an
alternative Norse evolution of the f/v sound,
(Cf En haven-Se hamn, OE swefn-Se sömn etc.)

>
> seks /seks/            [EN six, GE sechs, NL zes, WF seis, SV sex,
DN
> seks, NO seks]
>
> Yes but spell it as "sex" because it's more amusing. Seriosly with
[ks],
> I normally use a "x" because that's what the letter is there for.
It
> looks nicer to me than "ks". We only have a limited palette of
letters
> in the Roman alphabet, so it makes sense to me to use them all.
>

I'd say otherwise, spell them differently, but pronounce them the
same, seks for the cardinal number and sex for the carnal number.

>
>
> seven /se:v@n/    [EN seven, GE sieben, NL zeven, WF sawn/saun, SV
sju,
> DN syv, NO sju]
>
> Good but is debatable about whether to have the final "n".
Remember
> Dutch rarely pronouns all those final ns.
>
>

I think it should remain, since it's found in both English and
German.

>
> acht /a:xt/               retains PG /x/.
>
> [EN eight, GE acht, NL acht, WF acht, SV åtta, DN otte, NO åtte]
>
> Agreed
>
>
> nien /nI@n/           PG *niwun.  [EN nine, GE neun, NL negen, WF
> njuggen, SV nio, DN ni, NO ni]
>
> I would use "niun" here, but I see that you prono "ie" as dipthong.
>
>
>
> ten /te:n                 long vowel.
>
> [EN ten, GE zehn, NL tien, WF tsien, SV tio, DN ti, NO ti]
>
> I would make it "tejn" pronounced [teIn] assuming we have that
phoneme
> available. I put the "j" in there as a marker of the lost velar
> consonant that the old germanic languages had in that place. from
PG
> *tehan from PIE *dekm.
>
>

OK...

>
> elf /elf/                    [EN eleven, GE elf, NL elf, WF
*â**lf/**
> â**lve*, SV elva, DN elleve, NO elleve]
>
> Agreed except maybe "elv"
>
>
>
> twolv /tOlv/           [EN twelve, GE zwölf, NL twaalf, WF
toalve/toalf,
> SV tolv, DN tolv, NO tolv]
>
> Quite common pattern among the Germlangs is *-we- becoming  *u. As
in
> "sister" and "come"
> So maybe "tulv" would be OK. I still favour "twelv"
>

Yeah, keeping the root to twê

>
>
> 13-19       treten, fierten, fimften, seksten, seventen, achtten,
nienten
> So the "teen" suffix is exactly the same as the word for 10.
>
>
>
> 20�"90      twaintig, tretig, fiertig, fimftig, sekstig, seventig,
> achtting, nientig
>
>
>
> 24, 35      fier-ond-twaintig, fimf-ond-tretig
>
>

I'd prefer the En and Sca order of having the largest decimal first
twaintig-fier, tretig-fîv

>
> hunderd /hUnde:6d/    [EN hundred, GE hundert, NL honderd, WF
hûndert,
> SV hundra, DN hundrede, NO hundre]
>

Possibly hundred, since that's closer to the original compound,

www.etymonline.com:
Second element is P.Gmc. *rath "reckoning, number" (cf. Goth.
raþjo "a reckoning, account, number," garaþjan "to count").

>
>
> 200,300   twai hunderd, tre hunderd ….etc.
>
>
>
> tusend /tu:s@nd/                                 PG *thusundi,
PG “th”
> should be unvoiced and the “u” long.
>
>                                                 [EN thousand, GE
> tausend, NL duizend, WF tûzen, SV tusen, DN tusind, NO tusen]
>
> For the long u, I would have the û meta vowel here. This is
descended
> from PG long u. Once it is decided what the general prono of this
vowel
> is, we can apply it to this word.
>
>  So it might be pronounced as "taUs@nd" or "tu:z@nd or something.
>
>
>
> 10,000     ten tusend,            100,000   hunderd
> tusend                    1,000,000 miljon /mIljo:n/
>
> EN million DE Million NL miljoen, *WF miljoen, *DA million, SV
miljon,
> NO million
> We are somewhat split here between the languages the stick a j in
their
> million and thoses that don't But the two biggest languages are in
> agreement here. I see no point in changing the spelling
of "million"
> from the more common international "million". FS will likely have
lots
> of "-ion" words and IMHO we should spell them with "-ion" not "-
jon".
>

Yeah... Mostly it's the smaller languages that uses the j spelling,
btw...

>
> Also we need to decide what to do once we reach 10^9. Do we call
it a
> "milliard" or a "billion"? Also 10^12. Is this a "trillion" or a
> "billion"? How do the source languages do this? In English, we
normally
> say 10^9 = billion and 10^12 = trillion. But we still sometimes
get some
> pedantic and old-fashioned types who say "you're wrong, a billion
is a
> million times a million, your doing it the american way..."

Milliard and billion, it seems like among the core langs, there's
only English, particularly American, using the short scale...

Reply | Messages in this Topic (755)

#8016

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 12:34 pm
Subject: Re: Some FS basics

--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@x> wrote:
>  > The PG *th becomes either /d/ or /t/ and is spelt "d" or "t"
>
> > > respectively. Whether it becomes /d/ or /t/ depends on the
situation as
> > > to voicing in English and Scandinavian.
> > >
> >
> > Uhmmm, I disagree about this, I think it would be better if it
was dh
> > in all cases. You convinced me, earlier...
> >
> *Change view to UTF-8 in your browser or email client to read this
post
> correctly.
>
>
> Also I think marking *th would also be of just as much help to
German
> and Dutch speakers as to English Speakers. *
> Why? In German and Dutch *th in almost every case always
becomes "d"
> [d]. (denken, danken, Draht/draad, bedeute/beduiden, der/de
das/dat, doch)
> If we do in FS, what most of the members seem to be doing and
split *th
> into BOTH [t] (tenke, tanke, trâd betiude etc) and [d] (de, dat,
d�"ch,
> etc), this would be the cause of confusion for German and Dutch
> speakers. Especially probably for German speakers, since they also
have
> the High German consonant shift to contend with.

Quite possibly...

> So a "t" in FS could
> potentially be represented in a german cognate by "d" or "z"
or "t". And
> a "d" in FS could correspond to German "d" or "t". If we were to
mark
> voiced *th as, for example "�`" (crossed d) and unvoiced *th as "ŧ"
> (crossed t), then the relationship to High German, English, Dutch
and
> Scandinavian becomes very easy to decode: "ŧ" = EN th, NL d, DE d,
> Scandy t. "�`" = EN th, NL d, DE d, Scandy d.
> I realise this will only work for written FS. Without a different
prono
> for Đ vs D and Ŧ vs T, it will be of little use for spoken FS. But
I
> think initially FS will be more important as a written language.
Marking
> etymology will serve as a study and learning aid, that will allow
> speakers of various germlangs to de-code FS, with almost no
training. FS
> can be taught to novices in two ways simultaneously. Firstly
students
> can be taught it like any other foreign language, first learning
such
> things as greetings, numbers and phrases such as "Ik hêt..."
and "Wâr is
> �`e toilett?". But at the same time they can be taught how to de-
code FS
> words that they don't recognise into cognate words in their own
> language, so they can guess their way through unfamiliar FS
language
> situations.

I have to think this over, for now I only use the crossed d...

#8017

From: David Parke <parked@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 12:36 pm
Subject: Re: Utlegging fon stemspraken-poll resultaten

parked71

tungol65 wrote:

> Here is my interpretation of the poll results about what languages
> (stemspraken?) to use in Folkspraak and how they are weighted.
>
> Languages to be considered when creating Folkspraak
>
> * Standard English (including Scots)
> * Standard High German (including Schwiizert��tsch, Alemannic,
> Bavarian all other High German dialects)
> * Low German and Low Saxon (Plattdeutsch & Niedersachsisch)
> * Standard Dutch (Nederlands) (including Afrikaans)
> * West Frisian
> * Danish
> * Swedish
> * Norwegian (Nynorsk)
> * Icelandic
> * Interlingua (only in tie-break situations and internationalisms)
> * Slovio (only in tie-break situations and internationalisms)
>
> Dialect words can only be used, where the meaning is well known
> (e.g. English "bairn")
> Archaic words can only be used, where the meaning is well known
> (e.g. English "thou")
>
> Languages not to be considered when creating Folkspraak
>
> * Yiddish
> * North Frisian
> * Norwegian (Bokmal)
> * Faroese
>
May be we should have had an option to make Norwegian Bokmaal considered
but collectively with Danish. So if the word is the same in these two
languages, they count for only one.
Collectively, the population Speaking Danish+BM would be similar to that
speaking Swedish.


> Languages with no clear decision
>
> * Gothic
>
> Weighting & Points
>
> The weighting should be by graduations (the lowest gets 1 point, the
> next highest gets 2 points and so on). Number of speakers (primary)
> data from Wikipedia.
>
> (9 points) English (380,000,000)
> (8 points) German (95,000,000)
> (7 points) Dutch (30,000,000)1
> (6 points) Plattdeutsch (10,000,000)2
> (5 points) Swedish (9,300,000)
> (4 points) Danish (5,500,000)
> (3 points) Nynorsk (690,000)3
> (2 points) West Frisian (530,000)4
> (1 point) Icelandic (300,000)
>
>
I think the trick here is to grade the points so
Swedish+Danish+Norwegian+Icelandic doesn't excede the points of German
or English. These scandy languages are very closely related (well except
icelandic) are will quite often be in agreement with each other. Perhaps
German or English could have the same points. They just need to have
sufficiently more points to act as a tie-breaker.
So perhaps:
English 12pt
German 11pt
Dutch/Afrikaans 7 pts
Platt/Low Saxon 4
Swedish 4
Danish+Norwegian Bokmaal 4
Nynorsk 2
West Frisian 1
Icelandic 1

I realise I have set the points for Dutch and smaller languages quite a
lot less than German or English But remember Platt, West Frisian and
Dutch and Afrikaans are very often going to be in agreement so will make
a bloc with as many points as English or High German.

Once we've established the weightings of points, we'd need to set the
"pass mark" for whatever we were evaluating. We could set it to say, by
my point allocations, 23 points. This means if a word is present in both
German and English, it would be part of FS even if not in any other
germlangs. So this would allow a word like "lerne" to be in FS, since it
is only in English and German.

Let's just try to answer a sample issue with my suggested point
allocations. Should the FS would for "us" have a north sea germanic loss
of nasal or not. Us vs uns in other words

On the *US side
English 12
Swedish 4
Danish+BM 4
Nynorsk 2
West Frisian 1
Icelandic 1

On the *UNS side
German 11
Dutch 7

And Low Saxon throws a spanner in the works by having no standardised
form. Some dialects hav "us" and some have "ons"
So I will throw half of LS's points onto each side.

That gives *US 26 points and *UNS 20 points

Let's try it again with Tungol65's suggested points

On the *US side
English 9
Swedish 5
Danish 4
Nynorsk 3
West Frisian 2
Icelandic 1
Platt 3*

On the *UNS side
German 8
Dutch 7
Platt 3*

That gives *US 27 points and *UNS 18 points

So in both plans it looks as if the FS word for "us" should have no nasal.

> Notes
> 1. Including Afrikaans.
> 2. Figure from Ethnologue.com (number who understand the language).
> 3. Mean of 360,000 � 700,000 estimate.
> 4. 10%-15% of total of 4,600,000 Norwegian Speakers.
>
> R
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Browse the draft word lists!
> http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
> http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
>
> Browse Folkspraak-related links!
> http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "folkspraak
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/folkspraak>" on the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:folkspraak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (31)

#8018

From: "wakuran_wakaran" <hakans@...>
Date: Sun Oct 2, 2005 12:51 pm
Subject: Re: Utlegging fon stemspraken-poll resultaten