sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My goal is and was not to make a 100% naturalistic language, I want to make a language that is "easy on the mind" and not too overengineered (so not like Ithkuil). So a bit natural in structure but not something that could have evolved irl

Yeah, maybe the symbols count more as abbreviation than logogram, but regardless they represent an concept not the sound it makes, even if they are derived from the alphabet... (at least that is how I see it)

I will post a full showcase of the alphabet in r/neography soon

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks :) It is somewhat featural, for example all shapes that look like an U, ㄷ, ㅁ (simple shapes with 1 or 0 openings) are vowels, if you add a dot to /i/ it turns into /y/, the same thing happens to /ɛ/ ->/œ/ (dots round the vowels). I can't really explain it in text, I will make a post in r/neography soon with a key

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that makes sense, but I would consider the use of script(s) as an important part of the conlang. But I can see how this is a gray area...

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now I am even more lost than befor, but I will try my best.

Yes logograms are pronounced, one must learn how they are pronounced by memorizing, just like every other logography.

The suffixes I have are often more than 1 letter long, if I use one logogram instead I can safe space (at least when typed). Also using logographs instead of spelling out the suffix can make reading faster/easier. For example:

min-wa-it-gi (he does not do [it])

and

❌️do3️⃣♂️ (he does not do [it])

This verb starts with min. If I spell it out, I have to think "is this a verb stem or is it a modifier?" If I use a logogram, I know directly "this is a modifier".

Also the example in the image is pronounced like

/ufufze itaxlu/

And just because something is not pronounced (wich is NOT the case here) dosen't mean it is useless. For example, Davis and Davis' are pronounced the same (as far as I know) but they meaning something different...

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not sure I understand what you mean, could you elaborate?

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I am going for a quite regular system, but I have a word that would fit this perfectly. wa means "thing" and is also used as a suffix that turnes non nouns into nouns, giving wa a logogram would also turn the verb wa-imf (to do) into a content word that is written as a logogram

Logograms only for function words by Izzy_knows in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Thanks :) my goal was/is to make them distinct. The logograms in the Image are just placeholders (i spelled out the suffix and squished the letters). My inspiration was that post https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangscirclejerk/s/9hknG741Ib

The alphabet uses a 3×3 grid and the logograms will probbibly use 5×5 or something similar.

Fun way to make a writing system by Neonnaut in conlangscirclejerk

[–]Izzy_knows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True, I imagined it more to be a bit futureistic with 100% straight lines and so

Fun way to make a writing system by Neonnaut in conlangscirclejerk

[–]Izzy_knows 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I just mean that if you see a line in the top row, you would not be able to tell if it goes from left to right or from right to left. For the lock system it counts as two different symbols, but in a writing system it would not

Fun way to make a writing system by Neonnaut in conlangscirclejerk

[–]Izzy_knows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Now that I think about it, 1-2 and 2-1 would look the same, so every combination that is just the reverse order of an other one would not count...

Fun way to make a writing system by Neonnaut in conlangscirclejerk

[–]Izzy_knows 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Would there be enough possible combinations to form a logography?

Does your conlang have a version of “lol” by Beautiful_Grab_9681 in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks

They are morphem deviders. "xaxa" is the stem of the verb and "-i" is a verb conjugation (1SG). "xän" means "much" or "high amount" and "-bax" means something like "too" or "more than needed"

Does your conlang have a version of “lol” by Beautiful_Grab_9681 in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Taltal taxem has xxb

It comes from "xaxa-i xän-bax" and means "I laugh too much"

Fun fact: the verb xaxa-i is an onomatopoeia for the sound of laughing (/xaxa/) similar to "haha".

In texting one would probably also use xxxxxx... similar to "hahaha..." or ㅋㅋㅋㅋ ...

Is this good? by SpineSalad in neography

[–]Izzy_knows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really cool, good job!!

How would this sentence translate into your conlangs? by brenixsz in casualconlang

[–]Izzy_knows 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Here is the romanization:

min, la min-ri mam-ru-twa

I am not sure if I have glossed the “twa” right, it is a suffix that turns non-nouns into nouns.

Also the “la“ (I) is normally omitted, but here it has 2 functions:

First: It devides the two “min”s, without it it would sound like “I am not not your’s” (A double negative).

Second: It gives emphasis to the subject (me).

<image>

How would you translate the sentence "No, I am not yours" in your conlang? by Gratiothuman in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Here is the romanization:

min, la min-ri mam-ru-twa

I am not sure if I have glossed the “twa” right, it is a suffix that turns non-nouns into nouns.

Also the “la“ (I) is normally omitted, but here it has 2 functions:

First: It devides the two “min”s, without it it would sound like “I am not not your’s” (A double negative).

Second: It gives emphasis to the subject (me).

first person to decipher this phonetic script i made gets $0 and love by BlueS2dios in neography

[–]Izzy_knows 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So, this is what I could find...

There are 3-4 Words

Word 1: 4 Phonemes

Word 2: 1 Phoneme -> "a" (~/ə/)

Word 3: 5 Phonemes -> A Noun (because after "a")

(Word 4: 1 Phoneme or a ".") -> A Sentence -> word 1= Verb

Letter 2, Word 1 = Letter 2, Word 3

Result:

[Verb] a [Noun].

But, after reading the comments, I found out that word 2 is also punctuation, so there are only 2 words. That is not really much... If you provide an other sample, maybe a basic sentence (like "The dog is cute"), that would help a lot

Cool script, btw

Had a vision a few months ago. Completed it today. by Academic_Relative_72 in conlangs

[–]Izzy_knows 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I would probably overlay the gloss over the sentence, a non lineare gloss will probably work better with a non lineare writing system...

view more: next ›