Baraba - Concept for a new conlang

[Quetzalcoatl]

Baraba is my most current language project. My aim is to create a conlang, which is completely different to all other well-known natural languages and conlangs, especially to the languages belonging to the Indo-European language family. The first method to destroy all characteristics of Indo-European is to take away the common division of words. In nearly all other languages, a word is either a noun or a verb or an adjective or an adverb...

In Baraba, you can't associate a word with a special part of speach. Most words in Baraba have more than one meaning in English, for example the word "nëncs" (pronounce it like a French reading "ninch").
It has the following meanings among other things:

school, university, teacher, pupil, student, to teach, to learn and many more...

So a Baraba word is more a vague idea than a real word with a meaning. Since Baraba is an analytic language, it contains no flexion. So we have to use particles for the following functions:


1) Imagine we knew, that "nëncs" is a noun. We would still not know, if "nëncs" means school, university, teacher, pupil or something else. Therefore we have to use "attributing particles" to make clear the exact meaning of the word. For example:

cswa = "building"
pcsë = "job"
naj = female

nëncs cswa = school, university
nëncs pcsë = teacher
nëncs prsë naj = female teacher


In order to avoid that the Baraba sentences get very long because of these particles, there are also continious attributing particles. You put them to the end of a word (a word is a sequence of a root like nëncs and attributing particles). If you want to use the same word in a new sentence, you only have to say the root without the particles and everyone knows that you mean the same thing as in the sentence where you used the continous particle.

For example:


(ba ... ga means <this>, ctaka is the continous particle, ba ... mo is the copula, csi onja means <she>)


Ba nëncs pcsë naj ctaka ga.
Ba csi onja nëncs mo.

This is a teacher.
She is the teacher.


As you can see the particles <pcs> are not repeated in the second sentence, because <ctaka> already indicates, that in the next sentences nëncs always means teacher until it means something else, where other particles have to be used.



The rest follows soon...

[Nukalurk]

My aim is to create a conlang, which is completely different to all other well-known natural languages and conlangs, especially to the languages belonging to the Indo-European language family.

Then you should also get rid of the Latin script, and create a totally new one.

[Quetzalcoatl]

2) Brackets


Remember the phrases "if we knew that nëncs is a noun? Brackets are particles who consist of two parts, for example "ba ... ga" and "ba ... mo".
They describe the function of roots as well as they are also used for the syntax.


For example all words contained by the bracket particles "la...la" are used like verbs in the active voice:

Csi {no} = I

Csi no la nëncs la. - I teach.

"nëncs" can also mean teached, will teach, have teached, would teach etc.
You have to add attributing particles to make clear the tense, the mood, the aspect etc.
But if there aren't any particles, you always assumpt that it is present tense indicative.

There are also continous attributing particles for verb-phrases.


Brackets can also contain other brackets:

Ba nëncs la nëncs la ga. - The teacher teaches, literally: This is a teacher who teaches.

This is how you create relativ clauses in Baraba.
As you can see "la ... la" does not only show that the words it contains are used like verbs, but also that this sequence of words are the predicate of the sentence. By the way: you can put as many words into brackets as you like to. For example:


Ba "man, husband, father, son" ga.

I am a man, a husband, a father and a son.



Rest follows.

[Quetzalcoatl]

3)

Now we have an idea about the way speakers of Baraba assign their meaningless ideas or concepts to a special part of speach, how they substantiate their ideas so that they become real words and maybe first details about the syntax, for example you know the following constructions:



Ba ... ga. ­~ This is...
Ba ... mo. ­~ ... is ...

Subjects la ... la. ­~ Subject + Predicate

You also know that it is possible to combine brackets just as you do in maths.

BA father LA buy LA BA. ­~ The father buys something.



But a language does not only contain subjects and predicates and relative clauses, but also objects, adverbials etc.
Many features of Baraba syntax are expressed with single particles. They are always before the word they refer to. The idea receives a "part of speach" and a function in the sentence.
I call these particles "syntactical particles".


For example, a direkt object is indicated by the particle "cok". Furthermore, this particle comes always directly after the transitive word used like a verb in the bracket.

csi no = I
jato = child

Csi no la nencs cok jato la.

I teach the child.


jol = to hear in this phrase
cta = and

Ga csi la nencs cok jato cta jol la ga.
This is me teaching the child and hearing something.


If we left out cta, the sentence would mean
This is me teaching the child and someone who is hearing.

Csi la jol cok jato csi onja la.
I hear the child and her.

Csi la jol cok jato cta csi onja la.
I hear the child and I am like her.

Csi la jol cok pla jato csi onja pla la.
I hear the child which is her.



So its absolutely neccessary to place the syntacticle particles at the right place in order to avoid misunderstandings, because otherwise you refer to another word than you want to.

[Quetzalcoatl]

4) The fourth section of particles are the adverbial particles.

They are used to express locations, the time, the reason, the aim, the instrument, the condition etc.
In the contrary to normal languages, there is no special distinction between adverbials and subordinate clauses.


Csi la nu va pjo nojmi taka decsa la.


Csi = I
la ... la - Verb
nu - not
va - go
pjo nojmi - pout
taka - because (of)
decsa - it rains, the rain, it is rainy, rain falls down...




Well, these were the four classes of particles.

[Quetzalcoatl]

My aim is to create a conlang, which is completely different to all other well-known natural languages and conlangs, especially to the languages belonging to the Indo-European language family.

Then you should also get rid of the Latin script, and create a totally new one.

Well, at first I want to create the conlang with letters I can read. Maybe when I have finished the conlang, I will create an own script


Additionally, you would not be able to read it.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Now, let's go on to the problems of this grammar concept. I wrote my ideas about this conlang so early into this forum, because I need your help.
Maybe you have some ideas how to solve the problems:


1)

with all the particles the sentences are too long.
therefore i invented continous particles, so that it is possible to leave out information about a verb.

for those who did still not understand what i mean:
if a verb is in the present tense, indicative, active voice in the first sentence and this adjustments don't change, then why repeat all the particles?

but this leads to the following problem: leaving out information can cause misunderstandings, when a listener does not hear the speaker talking from the beginning.

2)
In order to avoid too long sentences, it is necessary to use only very short roots. Unfortunately a language usually has much more words than sound combinations in its phonetical inventory, especially if the words have to be monosyllabic. This is another problem

3)
Brackets in Brackets can lead to misunderstandings if they sound similar and make the sentence get too complex.



Have you any suggestions?

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

I like it. I don't have any suggestions, but the first you can do, is making more sounds in your language

[Nukalurk]

For me the concept sounds like a mixture between some Northern American Indian languages and Chinese.

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

For me the concept sounds like a mixture between some Northern American Indian languages and Chinese.

I think he doesn't want to hear that

[Quetzalcoatl]

For me the concept sounds like a mixture between some Northern American Indian languages and Chinese.

Well, I don't know anything about North American languages and my knowledge of Chinese is also very small. So if there are any similarities, then it's not my fault. Just a hazard


Maybe you can explain, where you find characteristics of Indian languages.

[Nukalurk]

I can't but pastorant talks about some of them from time to time.

[Quetzalcoatl]

I like it. I don't have any suggestions, but the first you can do, is making more sounds in your language

Well, I don't like inventing languages, when even I can't pronounce them. The phonetical inventory is already huge:


Plosives
b, p (bilabial) / d, t (alveolar) / c, q (palatal) / g,k (velar) / ? (glottal, before words beginning with a vowel)

Nasals
m (bilabial), n (alveolar), nj (palatal), ng (velar)

Fricatives:

v, f (bilabial) / z,s (alveolar) / gs, cs (postalveolar / h (velar/glottal) / j (palatal)

Affricates:

dz, c (alveolar) / gt, ct (postalveolar)

Trills:

r (alveolar)

(Lateral) Approximants:

w (labio-velar), l (alveolar velarized), j (palatal)



Vowels:


a = as in "cut"
e = as in "bet"
o = as in "stop"
u = as in "roof", before consonant as in "put"
ë = Schwa (as in "natiOn")

(so a, e, o, u are almost as in Spanish)

i after hard consonant = unrounded central closed vowel (polish y)
i after soft consonant = as in "deep"
i before consonant = as in "hit"
y after hard consonant = as in "deep"


an = nasalised "a"
en = nasalised "e"
in = palatalised nasalised ë
on = nasalised "o"
un = nasalised "ë"


All vowels surrounded by a red ring have nasal variants:
http://img143.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vokale1ma.png
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8298/vokale1ma.png

[Aszev]

I suggest showing this on a conlang forum, since you'd probably get more responses, opinions and suggestions there.

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

I like it. I don't have any suggestions, but the first you can do, is making more sounds in your language

Well, I don't like inventing languages, when even I can't pronounce them. The phonetical inventory is already huge:

Yes, I have the same. And I hate some sounds of Dutch, so I don't want to use them and now I have the feeling I have too less vowels But you are right, you have already a lot.

[EROZ]

Very good job! Barbara is so interesting... I mean
Baraba(new name maybe). Yes your analitic conlang is so chinese-like, which is not my favorite, even many chinese people don't like it; that why the chinese goverment(last century) allowed Esperanto to be teached, which has a Syntetic grammar.
But nothing wrong with your efforts, your posts were interesting and I'll be looking for new ones. Good Luck!!!