Qa'oisi - Revision history

Jutomi: /* Romanization */ -

2026-08-07T19:04:50Z

Romanization: -

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:04, 7 August 2026
Line 278:		Line 278:
	\|d		\|d
	\|g		\|g
	\|		\| -
	\| kˣ’		\| kˣ’
	\|k		\|k

Jutomi: ʔ

2026-08-07T19:04:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:04, 7 August 2026
Line 62:		Line 62:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	This analysis is fairly simple, and matches the romanization (with the addition of x to denote enunciation), although it is not perfect. Assuming a CVC structure, it assumes /ə/ is still a fully-fledged vowel that disappears in most environments, while all consonants other than fricatives, explosives, or a glottal stop may appear in coda position. This system is called the "ghost e" analysis, and can make words phonemically run a bit longer than other analyses, since a vowel and in some cases an additional missing unknown consonant need to be appended to stopped codas. ~~Alternatively~~, it assumes a CVCC structure, with /ʔ/ being not only possible in coda position, but also after any other consonant except /q/ and explosives; this analysis is considered unrealistic and not entirely true to the history or modern realization of its phonetic realizations. This system is called the "ghost x" analysis.		This analysis is fairly simple, and matches the romanization (with the addition of x to denote enunciation), although it is not perfect. Assuming a CVC structure, it assumes /ə/ is still a fully-fledged vowel that disappears in most environments, while all consonants other than fricatives, explosives, or a glottal stop may appear in coda position. This system is called the "ghost e" analysis, and can make words phonemically run a bit longer than other analyses, since a vowel and in some cases an additional missing unknown consonant need to be appended to stopped codas. A rnatively, it assumes a CVCC structure, with /ʔ/ being not only possible in coda position, but also after any other consonant except /q/ and explosives; this analysis is considered unrealistic and not entirely true to the history or modern realization of its phonetic realizations. This system is called the "ghost x" analysis.

	Another, alternative analysis is that all consonants (except either /q/ or /ʔ/) have a duplicate, no-audible-release (or "stopped coda") version, and that these are phonemically distinct. (I.e. /p/ is distinct from /p̚/ in coda positions). The "dual coda" analysis suggests twice as many phonemes, which, along with somewhat more nuanced places of articulation, a linguist popularized with the below table.		Another, alternative analysis is that all consonants (except either /q/ or /ʔ/) have a duplicate, no-audible-release (or "stopped coda") version, and that these are phonemically distinct. (I.e. /p/ is distinct from /p̚/ in coda positions). The "dual coda" analysis suggests twice as many phonemes, which, along with somewhat more nuanced places of articulation, a linguist popularized with the below table.
Line 292:		Line 292:
	\|s		\|s
	\| -		\| -
	\| q̚		\| q̚ʔ
	\|}		\|}
	Note: Capital X is sometimes used for non-written shorthands or other purposes, or if all caps are used. In most cases, it follows a consonant to indicate that it has audible release, although it is used for c, j, and q to spell the ejectives. Coda ' when followed by a vowel is spelled 'x. Semantic - is used for compounds and contractions, much like a traditional hyphen or apostrophe, and is considered a punctuation rather than a letter.		Note: Capital X is sometimes used for non-written shorthands or other purposes, or if all caps are used. In most cases, it follows a consonant to indicate that it has audible release, although it is used for c, j, and q to spell the ejectives. Coda ' when followed by a vowel is spelled 'x. Semantic - is used for compounds and contractions, much like a traditional hyphen or apostrophe, and is considered a punctuation rather than a letter.

Jutomi: Removed verbs; preferred that for 'Arborese, will need a new system here :')

2026-08-05T22:12:12Z

Removed verbs; preferred that for 'Arborese, will need a new system here :')

Show changes

Jutomi: more auxiliary combinations.

2026-08-05T21:11:58Z

more auxiliary combinations.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:11, 5 August 2026
Line 549:		Line 549:
	\| colspan="5" \|''anti-affirmative when put before a verb, with the positive or negative of the verb reflecting what actually happened''		\| colspan="5" \|''anti-affirmative when put before a verb, with the positive or negative of the verb reflecting what actually happened''
	\|}		\|}
	In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely. ''Take Over,'' ''Rest,'' and ''Change'' may also be used before other auxiliary verbs (including be + another auxiliary) and can appear with independent aspect markers.		In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely. ''Start, Stop, Lay, Take Over,'' ''Rest,'' and ''Change'' may also be used before some other auxiliary verbs (including be + another auxiliary) and can appear with independent aspect markers.

	Several adverbs may also be used, as well as number to indicate number of times something has been done (in the nominative; the absolutive it implies for the nth time).		Several adverbs may also be used, as well as number to indicate number of times something has been done (in the nominative; the absolutive it implies for the nth time).

Jutomi: added Change auxiliary

2026-08-05T21:08:42Z

added Change auxiliary

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:08, 5 August 2026
Line 530:		Line 530:
	\|''Both''		\|''Both''
	\| colspan="5" \|''same as above, but for the process or no longer doing an action''		\| colspan="5" \|''same as above, but for the process or no longer doing an action''
			\|-
			\| rowspan="2" \|Change + Verb
			\|Progressive
			\| rowspan="2" \|''Realis (exclusive)''
			\| colspan="5" \|''switching from an old task to a new task''
			\|-
			\|Perfective
			\| colspan="5" \|''altering how a task is being performed''
	\|-		\|-
	\| rowspan="2" \|''Is/Didn't'' + Verb		\| rowspan="2" \|''Is/Didn't'' + Verb
Line 541:		Line 549:
	\| colspan="5" \|''anti-affirmative when put before a verb, with the positive or negative of the verb reflecting what actually happened''		\| colspan="5" \|''anti-affirmative when put before a verb, with the positive or negative of the verb reflecting what actually happened''
	\|}		\|}
	In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely. ''Take Over'' and ''~~Rest~~'' may also be used before other auxiliary verbs (including be + another auxiliary) and can appear with independent aspect markers.		In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely. ''Take Over,'' ''Rest,'' and ''Change'' may also be used before other auxiliary verbs (including be + another auxiliary) and can appear with independent aspect markers.

	Several adverbs may also be used, as well as number to indicate number of times something has been done (in the nominative; the absolutive it implies for the nth time).		Several adverbs may also be used, as well as number to indicate number of times something has been done (in the nominative; the absolutive it implies for the nth time).

Jutomi: /* Verbs */ Added two auxiliary verbs I'd thought of watching Mia conlang :')

2026-08-04T22:32:03Z

Verbs: Added two auxiliary verbs I'd thought of watching Mia conlang :')

@@ Line 510: / Line 510: @@
 |''Realis (exclusive)''
 | colspan="5" |''excellent version of the realis stative verbs''
 |-
 | rowspan="2" |''Is/Didn't'' + Verb
@@ Line 521: / Line 541: @@
 | colspan="5" |''anti-affirmative when put before a verb, with the positive or negative of the verb reflecting what actually happened''
 |}
-In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely.
+In addition, the auxiliary ''be'' may appear before both wear and hold, although this only acts as a detransitiviser, and agrees with the aspect of the following auxiliary verb. The affirmative/negative auxiliaries may also appear before any other auxiliary verb, including be; this allows affirmatives and negatives that are uncertain or unlikely. ''Take Over'' and ''Rest'' may also be used before other auxiliary verbs (including be + another auxiliary) and can appear with independent aspect markers.
 Several adverbs may also be used, as well as number to indicate number of times something has been done (in  the nominative; the absolutive it implies for the nth time).

Jutomi: explosives

2026-07-24T04:36:53Z

explosives

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:36, 24 July 2026
Line 62:		Line 62:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	This analysis is fairly simple, and matches the romanization (with the addition of x to denote enunciation), although it is not perfect. Assuming a CVC structure, it assumes /ə/ is still a fully-fledged vowel that disappears in most environments, while all consonants other than fricatives, ~~ejectives~~, or a glottal stop may appear in coda position. This system is called the "ghost e" analysis, and can make words phonemically run a bit longer than other analyses, since a vowel and in some cases an additional missing unknown consonant need to be appended to stopped codas. Alternatively, it assumes a CVCC structure, with /ʔ/ being not only possible in coda position, but also after any other consonant except /q/ and ~~ejectives~~; this analysis is considered unrealistic and not entirely true to the history or modern realization of its phonetic realizations. This system is called the "ghost x" analysis.		This analysis is fairly simple, and matches the romanization (with the addition of x to denote enunciation), although it is not perfect. Assuming a CVC structure, it assumes /ə/ is still a fully-fledged vowel that disappears in most environments, while all consonants other than fricatives, explosives, or a glottal stop may appear in coda position. This system is called the "ghost e" analysis, and can make words phonemically run a bit longer than other analyses, since a vowel and in some cases an additional missing unknown consonant need to be appended to stopped codas. Alternatively, it assumes a CVCC structure, with /ʔ/ being not only possible in coda position, but also after any other consonant except /q/ and explosives; this analysis is considered unrealistic and not entirely true to the history or modern realization of its phonetic realizations. This system is called the "ghost x" analysis.

	Another, alternative analysis is that all consonants (except either /q/ or /ʔ/) have a duplicate, no-audible-release (or "stopped coda") version, and that these are phonemically distinct. (I.e. /p/ is distinct from /p̚/ in coda positions). The "dual coda" analysis suggests twice as many phonemes, which, along with somewhat more nuanced places of articulation, a linguist popularized with the below table.		Another, alternative analysis is that all consonants (except either /q/ or /ʔ/) have a duplicate, no-audible-release (or "stopped coda") version, and that these are phonemically distinct. (I.e. /p/ is distinct from /p̚/ in coda positions). The "dual coda" analysis suggests twice as many phonemes, which, along with somewhat more nuanced places of articulation, a linguist popularized with the below table.
Line 114:		Line 114:
	Another thing of note is that, on account of the nature of applosives, the realization of non-released fricatives and nasals is that they are brief consonants, either glottalized or abruptly followed by an applosive. Thus, while s̚, ç̚, m̚, n̚, ɲ̚, and ɴ̚ may not truly exist, they are often written as useful shorthands; despite this, their true nature likely means /s̚/ is actually closer to [s̆t̚] or [ˢt̚], etc.		Another thing of note is that, on account of the nature of applosives, the realization of non-released fricatives and nasals is that they are brief consonants, either glottalized or abruptly followed by an applosive. Thus, while s̚, ç̚, m̚, n̚, ɲ̚, and ɴ̚ may not truly exist, they are often written as useful shorthands; despite this, their true nature likely means /s̚/ is actually closer to [s̆t̚] or [ˢt̚], etc.

	It lastly should be noted that ~~ejective consonants~~ are ~~always ''strong'' ejectives;~~ that is, ~~they have~~ a "spatting" quality and ~~are~~ always fortis in nature. This is different from both plosives and ~~ejectives~~ followed by /ʔ/, where the former may result in a weak ejective (sometimes notated as [Cˀ]) and ~~ejectives followed by~~ a lengthened glottal ~~stop~~. /cʼ~kʼ/ and /tʼ/ ~~are notably usually affricated as ejectives, although this is non-contrastive,~~ while /q/ ~~often~~ does not ~~have significant frication (although may have more than /qʼ/)~~.		It lastly should be noted that explosives are usually tense, often fricated plosives that are sometimes weakly ejective in nature, having a "spatting" quality and always being fortis in nature. This is different from both plosives and explosives followed by /ʔ/, where the former may result in a weak ejective (sometimes notated as [Cˀ]) and the latter a true strong ejective with a lengthened glottal release. /cʼ~kʼ/ and /tʼ/ most often have fricated release while /qʼ/ generally does not, though there is no phonemic contrast.

	Another thing worth noting is that the status of /q̚/ is disputed even among those who prefer the dual codas model, as it phonemically arises from /q/ much the same way other non-released stops are. However, it is not entirely clear if this is accurate, since it seems like it can be identical to /ʔ/, though there are some distinct impacts on following vowels rather than prior vowels, though in rare cases it may even surface as [ʡ]. Since it is in complementary distribution with /ʔ/, they are sometimes instead analyzed one and the same, while others prefer a distinct /q̚/. This problem also persists in the simplified phonemic inventory, since the sound could still be represented better phonotactically with /q/ but phonetically with /ʔ/. Additionally, some linguists prefer to stick /ʔ/ next to /q/ and refer to the entire column as "gutteral".		Another thing worth noting is that the status of /q̚/ is disputed even among those who prefer the dual codas model, as it phonemically arises from /q/ much the same way other non-released stops are. However, it is not entirely clear if this is accurate, since it seems like it can be identical to /ʔ/, though there are some distinct impacts on following vowels rather than prior vowels, though in rare cases it may even surface as [ʡ]. Since it is in complementary distribution with /ʔ/, they are sometimes instead analyzed one and the same, while others prefer a distinct /q̚/. This problem also persists in the simplified phonemic inventory, since the sound could still be represented better phonotactically with /q/ but phonetically with /ʔ/. Additionally, some linguists prefer to stick /ʔ/ next to /q/ and refer to the entire column as "gutteral".

	Lastly, there have been a proposal to consider ~~ejectives~~ as the inaudible release equivalents for /tˢ/, /cˣ/ and /q/, and instead analyze /q̚/ as a simple coda /ʔ/. This proposal would even work better with ghost-e and ghost-x analyses, as it'd remove many phonotactic constraints; however, it'd also add unnecessary complications, since unlike applosives, ~~ejectives~~ can in fact appear in onset positions.		Lastly, there have been a proposal to consider explosives as the inaudible release equivalents for /tˢ/, /cˣ/ and /q/, and instead analyze /q̚/ as a simple coda /ʔ/. This proposal would even work better with ghost-e and ghost-x analyses, as it'd remove many phonotactic constraints; however, it'd also add unnecessary complications, since unlike applosives, explosives can in fact appear in onset positions.

	=== Phonotactics ===		=== Phonotactics ===

Jutomi: Undo revision 41738 by Jutomi (talk) Just to keep it available. As an aside were it not for diphthongs which are kinda imperative I'd have considered keeping it :p (kinda sad I have no tonal conlangs on nguhcraft tho)

2026-07-20T21:31:18Z

Undo revision 41738 by Jutomi (talk) Just to keep it available. As an aside were it not for diphthongs which are kinda imperative I'd have considered keeping it :p (kinda sad I have no tonal conlangs on nguhcraft tho)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:31, 20 July 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:

	=== Vowels ===		=== Vowels ===
	There are only 3 vowels in Qa'oisi: <Ii> /i/, <Aa> /a/, and <Oo> /o/~~. Addititionally, these vowels may be high tone or low tone (written <Ee>, <Uu> and <Ww>)~~. These vowels may appear next to each other or on their own, allowing for allophonic glides and diphthongs, although these are not considered unique and are in free variation with normal vowel hiatus. One analysis also preserves /ə/, which still appears phonetically between voiced stops, while becoming either an assimilating voiceless puff of frication or otherwise disappearing entirely in all other environments.		There are only 3 vowels in Qa'oisi: <Ii> /i/, <Aa> /a/, and <Oo> /o/. These vowels may appear next to each other or on their own, allowing for allophonic glides and diphthongs, although these are not considered unique and are in free variation with normal vowel hiatus. One analysis also preserves /ə/, which still appears phonetically between voiced stops, while becoming either an assimilating voiceless puff of frication or otherwise disappearing entirely in all other environments.

	=== Consonants ===		=== Consonants ===
Line 201:		Line 201:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 3,~~684 hypothetically~~ possible syllables, with 620 different possible ~~intervocalic~~ consonants/clusters. ~~(Including diphthongs, there may be 25,788 possible syllables.)~~		Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 1,842 possible syllables, with 620 different possible intervocal consonants/clusters.

	=== Romanization ===		=== Romanization ===
Line 211:		Line 211:
	!Cc		!Cc
	!Dd		!Dd
	~~!Ee~~
	!Gg		!Gg
	!Ii		!Ii
Line 224:		Line 223:
	!Ss		!Ss
	!Tt		!Tt
	~~!Uu~~
	~~!Ww~~
	!Yy		!Yy
	!Zz		!Zz
Line 232:		Line 229:
	\|-		\|-
	\|Basic IPA / Onset		\|Basic IPA / Onset
	\|/á/		\|/a/
	\|/b/		\|/b/
	\|/tˢ/		\|/tˢ/
	\|/d/		\|/d/
	~~\|/i/~~
	\|/g/		\|/g/
	\|/i/		\|/i/
Line 249:		Line 245:
	\|/x/		\|/x/
	\|/t/		\|/t/
	~~\|/á/~~
	~~\|/o/~~
	\|/ɲ/		\|/ɲ/
	\|/s/		\|/s/
Line 257:		Line 251:
	\|-		\|-
	\|In Coda		\|In Coda
	\|ắ~ ́ʕ		\|ă~ʕ
	\|b̚		\|b̚
	\|tˢ		\|tˢ
	\|d̚		\|d̚
	~~\|ɪ̆̀~ ̀j~~
	\|g̚		\|g̚
	\|~~ɪ̆́~~~ ́j		\|ɪ̆~j
	\|kˣ		\|kˣ
	\|k̚		\|k̚
	\|m̚		\|m̚
	\|n̚		\|n̚
	\|ŏ́~ ́w		\|ŏ~w
	\|p̚		\|p̚
	\|q		\|q
Line 274:		Line 267:
	\|x̚		\|x̚
	\|t̚		\|t̚
	~~\|ằ~ ̀ʕ~~
	~~\|ŏ̀~ ̀w~~
	\|ɲ̚		\|ɲ̚
	\|s̚		\|s̚
Line 286:		Line 277:
	\| tˢ’		\| tˢ’
	\|d		\|d
	~~\| -~~
	\|g		\|g
	\| -		\|
	\| kˣ’		\| kˣ’
	\|k		\|k
Line 299:		Line 289:
	\|x		\|x
	\|t		\|t
	~~\| -~~
	~~\| -~~
	\|ɲ		\|ɲ
	\|s		\|s

Jutomi: /* Phonology */ Wanted to make it tonal. Decided against it but I'm saving this version just in case I do want to keep it cause I don't feel like redoing that table junk.

2026-07-20T21:30:05Z

Phonology: Wanted to make it tonal. Decided against it but I'm saving this version just in case I do want to keep it cause I don't feel like redoing that table junk.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 20 July 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:

	=== Vowels ===		=== Vowels ===
	There are only 3 vowels in Qa'oisi: <Ii> /i/, <Aa> /a/, and <Oo> /o/. These vowels may appear next to each other or on their own, allowing for allophonic glides and diphthongs, although these are not considered unique and are in free variation with normal vowel hiatus. One analysis also preserves /ə/, which still appears phonetically between voiced stops, while becoming either an assimilating voiceless puff of frication or otherwise disappearing entirely in all other environments.		There are only 3 vowels in Qa'oisi: <Ii> /i/, <Aa> /a/, and <Oo> /o/. Addititionally, these vowels may be high tone or low tone (written <Ee>, <Uu> and <Ww>). These vowels may appear next to each other or on their own, allowing for allophonic glides and diphthongs, although these are not considered unique and are in free variation with normal vowel hiatus. One analysis also preserves /ə/, which still appears phonetically between voiced stops, while becoming either an assimilating voiceless puff of frication or otherwise disappearing entirely in all other environments.

	=== Consonants ===		=== Consonants ===
Line 201:		Line 201:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 1,~~842~~ possible syllables, with 620 different possible ~~intervocal~~ consonants/clusters.		Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 3,684 hypothetically possible syllables, with 620 different possible intervocalic consonants/clusters. (Including diphthongs, there may be 25,788 possible syllables.)

	=== Romanization ===		=== Romanization ===
Line 211:		Line 211:
	!Cc		!Cc
	!Dd		!Dd
			!Ee
	!Gg		!Gg
	!Ii		!Ii
Line 223:		Line 224:
	!Ss		!Ss
	!Tt		!Tt
			!Uu
			!Ww
	!Yy		!Yy
	!Zz		!Zz
Line 229:		Line 232:
	\|-		\|-
	\|Basic IPA / Onset		\|Basic IPA / Onset
	\|/a/		\|/á/
	\|/b/		\|/b/
	\|/tˢ/		\|/tˢ/
	\|/d/		\|/d/
			\|/i/
	\|/g/		\|/g/
	\|/i/		\|/i/
Line 245:		Line 249:
	\|/x/		\|/x/
	\|/t/		\|/t/
			\|/á/
			\|/o/
	\|/ɲ/		\|/ɲ/
	\|/s/		\|/s/
Line 251:		Line 257:
	\|-		\|-
	\|In Coda		\|In Coda
	\|ă~ʕ		\|ắ~ ́ʕ
	\|b̚		\|b̚
	\|tˢ		\|tˢ
	\|d̚		\|d̚
			\|ɪ̆̀~ ̀j
	\|g̚		\|g̚
	\|ɪ̆~j		\|ɪ̆́~ ́j
	\|kˣ		\|kˣ
	\|k̚		\|k̚
	\|m̚		\|m̚
	\|n̚		\|n̚
	\|ŏ~w		\|ŏ́~ ́w
	\|p̚		\|p̚
	\|q		\|q
Line 267:		Line 274:
	\|x̚		\|x̚
	\|t̚		\|t̚
			\|ằ~ ̀ʕ
			\|ŏ̀~ ̀w
	\|ɲ̚		\|ɲ̚
	\|s̚		\|s̚
Line 277:		Line 286:
	\| tˢ’		\| tˢ’
	\|d		\|d
			\| -
	\|g		\|g
	\|		\| -
	\| kˣ’		\| kˣ’
	\|k		\|k
Line 289:		Line 299:
	\|x		\|x
	\|t		\|t
			\| -
			\| -
	\|ɲ		\|ɲ
	\|s		\|s

Jutomi: /* Phonotactics */ recalculated.

2026-07-11T15:58:44Z

Phonotactics: recalculated.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 11 July 2026
Line 201:		Line 201:
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}
	Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 1,~~860~~ possible syllables, with 620 different possible intervocal consonants/clusters.		Using dual coda analysis, there are an estimated 1,842 possible syllables, with 620 different possible intervocal consonants/clusters.

	=== Romanization ===		=== Romanization ===