Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

at all how

0 (0%)

to delete poll.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 0

[Nonsequitorian]

Wont adjectives already do that? I mean, if you use them it'll already be longer than most english words.

[Myrkky100]

Frankly I didn't notice the similarity to Newspeak, I guess since my own native tongue is synthetic to the point of "world" being "earthair" 

Having words come off from roots would give more flow to the language and create more managable phrases. But it also creates a larger vocabulary (good in principle but harder to learn) and requires more grammar to guide the word formation. And both combination and deriving require a lot of fiddling around with the vocabulary we already have in the game, which some might want to keep as intact as possible.

Are there any other mechanisms for forming words?

[dwarfhoplite]

Another point worth discussing is that how specific we will have to go. Like, do dwarves really make difference between different species of trees and creatures. I'd imagine that dwarves have specific words mostly for things that matter in their culture such as metal, alcohol.
Cave crawler, ant and a tick: they're just insects.

[Owlbread]

Another point worth discussing is that how specific we will have to go. Like, do dwarves really make difference between different species of trees and creatures. I'd imagine that dwarves have specific words mostly for things that matter in their culture such as metal, alcohol.
Cave crawler, ant and a tick: they're just insects.

No, no they're not. Ticks aren't insects, they're arachnids. They also suck your blood and swell up and can spread disease, ants don't. Cave crawlers also have many many legs and, if they're voracious, are so big they can be ridden by goblins as a mount. It makes perfect sense for Dwarves to have different names for things like that.

[Helgoland]

In English you have both kinds: "Bug" for creepy crawly stuff, "insect" and "spider" and "tick" as more specific terms, and finally the species names for the biologists. Even though most of the time it doesn't matter whether it's... okay, pressed for an example here, but you get my point: Even if it's not necessary, you usually still have a word.

[SealyStar]

Frankly I didn't notice the similarity to Newspeak, I guess since my own native tongue is synthetic to the point of "world" being "earthair" 

Having words come off from roots would give more flow to the language and create more managable phrases. But it also creates a larger vocabulary (good in principle but harder to learn) and requires more grammar to guide the word formation. And both combination and deriving require a lot of fiddling around with the vocabulary we already have in the game, which some might want to keep as intact as possible.

Are there any other mechanisms for forming words?

What language is this? Suddenly I'm interested.

[dwarfhoplite]

Frankly I didn't notice the similarity to Newspeak, I guess since my own native tongue is synthetic to the point of "world" being "earthair" 

Having words come off from roots would give more flow to the language and create more managable phrases. But it also creates a larger vocabulary (good in principle but harder to learn) and requires more grammar to guide the word formation. And both combination and deriving require a lot of fiddling around with the vocabulary we already have in the game, which some might want to keep as intact as possible.

Are there any other mechanisms for forming words?

What language is this? Suddenly I'm interested.

That would be Finnish
maailma = world
maa = earth
ilma = air

funny enough

ilmapallo = balloon
maapallo = the Earth (planet)

meri = sea
valta = power

merivalta = maritime power
valtameri = ocean

[Myrkky100]

In English you have both kinds: "Bug" for creepy crawly stuff, "insect" and "spider" and "tick" as more specific terms, and finally the species names for the biologists. Even though most of the time it doesn't matter whether it's... okay, pressed for an example here, but you get my point: Even if it's not necessary, you usually still have a word.

I think, at least to begin with, the vocabulary should follow the existing phraseology of the game as much as possible, because talking about the game is the primary use of the language. So a word for "vermin" and then species names. Not to say that the vocabulary shouldn't be extended and attention shouldn't be paid to how dwarf culture would have influenced language development but I think those things can be thought about more once rudimentary usability in the context of this forum has been established.

Frankly I didn't notice the similarity to Newspeak, I guess since my own native tongue is synthetic to the point of "world" being "earthair" 

What language is this? Suddenly I'm interested.

That would be Finnish
maailma = world
maa = earth
ilma = air

The thing is, as a native speaker you really don't pay attention to this. I'd hazard to guess that a native English speaker doesn't go "I'm writing on the key-board", having a mental image of a key and a plank. Equally, if Dwarven used a lot of combination, it wouldn't sound newspeaky to dwarves. But in practice, if a combination heavy vocabulary gives an orwellian feeling to native English speakers, that is something to take into account since they form the majority of DF players.

[Inarius]

Well, I think that we should take into account the context in which the words were created.

It is highly possible that dwarves have a common root for the words "clowns", "magma", "circus" and "candy". Not that is mandatory, but quite possible, as it was discovered at the same time and is generally linked.

You try to compare the diversity of our languages and of Dwarf. But you can't ! Because we europeans are highly mixed with several languages (speaking of French, latin, Norse, Gallic, Arabic and a lot more).
In the case of dwarves, even if we could, for example, use some words from human, elves or Goblin (I would like that the word "kidnapping", "rapt", "impalement" and "torture" would be the same in goblin and dwarf), the languages have very few chances to change, apart from internal changes. Therefore, I am for a language which could be near from its "natural" sources, that is to say that we should think of simple things and questions :

- When and why would they name these things for the first time ?
- Is it possible to combine these words ? After all, a dragon is a flying creature who can breathe fire. And a bronze colossus is a Bronze statue. Of course the word could have change. (bronze : kilrud and pillar : obok). Bronze statue could first have been "kilrud obok", litteraly, but after that could evolve with something logical, such as "Obolrud" or "kilobo", or anything which is quite near from the original source, but quite different. As it was said before, nobody thinks of a "key" and a "board" when he writes something on this forum. But the original of the word is simple...
- That's for the names. But what about adjectives and verbs ?

[Owlbread]

Well, I think that we should take into account the context in which the words were created.

It is highly possible that dwarves have a common root for the words "clowns", "magma", "circus" and "candy". Not that is mandatory, but quite possible, as it was discovered at the same time and is generally linked.

You try to compare the diversity of our languages and of Dwarf. But you can't ! Because we europeans are highly mixed with several languages (speaking of French, latin, Norse, Gallic, Arabic and a lot more).
In the case of dwarves, even if we could, for example, use some words from human, elves or Goblin (I would like that the word "kidnapping", "rapt", "impalement" and "torture" would be the same in goblin and dwarf), the languages have very few chances to change, apart from internal changes. Therefore, I am for a language which could be near from its "natural" sources, that is to say that we should think of simple things and questions :

- When and why would they name these things for the first time ?
- Is it possible to combine these words ? After all, a dragon is a flying creature who can breathe fire. And a bronze colossus is a Bronze statue. Of course the word could have change. (bronze : kilrud and pillar : obok). Bronze statue could first have been "kilrud obok", litteraly, but after that could evolve with something logical, such as "Obolrud" or "kilobo", or anything which is quite near from the original source, but quite different. As it was said before, nobody thinks of a "key" and a "board" when he writes something on this forum. But the original of the word is simple...
- That's for the names. But what about adjectives and verbs ?

Are you sure they have to change like that though? Without there being special rules for that sort of thing it could be hard for us to work it out. Why not just have Kilrudobok? Or Obokilrud? (The omission of the extra K is just for ease of pronunciation)

In Scots Gaelic, if we are referring to a restaurant we just call it a taigh-bidh, meaning "house of food" or "food house". Same with museum - taigh-tasgaidh, cinema - taigh-dealbh (house of pictures/picture house). The point is we don't really change the words all that much, we just say them directly as they are.

In addition, Inarius, I am sorry for going off topic, but can I ask what your native language is?

[Inarius]

Well, Owlbread, if you don't think it would be too much simplistic, I'm not against just putting the words one after one to make new words.  It was just a thought or a try to recreate an etymology and the power of time on a language.

Of course you can ask ! My native language is French, but i also know Spanish, as well as Occitan.
I'm glad you asked, it means it's not SO obvious, as French are usually not very good in languages (and let alone english)

[Nonsequitorian]

It's not the combination of words that makes it newspeak sounding, it's the use of binaries for the simplest of things. Saying light is no-dark doesn't sound like newspeak, it IS newspeak, where bad is literally "ungood" and really bad is "double ungood." Although newspeak focused normally on the undark part of things, that is to say the things that are not ungood.

I don't mind making the Dwarven Language sound germanic, what with bronze collosus being Obokrud (or whatever, I imagine Obokrud would be the smushed up version of Obokilrud). But if enemy were no-friend, then we wouldn't really know if what they were talking about were enemies or people who just weren't friends (like say the humans). If water were no-booze, then it'd be also all other liquids other than booze, too.

In some cases, using a binary system for words might be funny and give insight to the creation of the word. If Bronze collosus were instead "Not-bronze statue[!]" then one could assume that's what was said exactly at the time of the collosus' discovery!

But for the most part, I think it'd be nice if we stayed away from opposites for the simple things.

Also, going back to the discussion of friend-foe ani-inanimates, I think that's a splendid idea. It'd would actually make sense for Bronze Collosus to be "Not-statue" with some sort of animate, foe ending. Could make for some interesting distinctions between things.

[Owlbread]

Well, Owlbread, if you don't think it would be too much simplistic, I'm not against just putting the words one after one to make new words.  It was just a thought or a try to recreate an etymology and the power of time on a language.

Of course you can ask ! My native language is French, but i also know Spanish, as well as Occitan.
I'm glad you asked, it means it's not SO obvious, as French are usually not very good in languages (and let alone english)

Ah, I see. I could tell that your native language was affecting your English in quite an interesting way (not that it made you any less understandable, you just have an interesting way of speaking), but I could not tell what language it was. I'm also very impressed that you know Occitan.

But yes, I see what you mean about the etymology and I agree that the power of time is something that we should try to convey when we make this language. I was just thinking we might find it quite hard to do though if we didn't have a set pattern, although I suppose English didn't follow set patterns when it bastardised French and Latin words.

[Helgoland]

French and Germanic/Anglo-Saxon, afaik. Mushing up french and latin wouldn't be too exciting because french developed for the mmost part out of latin.

[Owlbread]

French and Germanic/Anglo-Saxon, afaik. Mushing up french and latin wouldn't be too exciting because french developed for the mmost part out of latin.

Actually, English does have Anglo-Saxon and Viking influences, very strong ones, but think of how many words we have that are based on Latin or Greek but slightly corrupted. As an example, virtually anything scientific. French stuff is everywhere too. Sometimes it feels like most of the English language's vocabulary is Romance.