Fandom

Conlang

Comments0

Productive and Unproductive Word Generation

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

As I've mentioned before, Shabkiuza has a high degree of regularity, but I don't want it to be completely regular. This dichotomy is emerging, at the moment, in my attempts to build a vocabulary.

I downloaded a list of the word base of Simple English, and I have been assigning words to it. I have also found a list of all English language words, which includes not just root words but every plural form, every -ing and -ed on the end of the verb, as a separate entry.

When I enter a gloss in the simple list, it appears automatically in the full list. I can then visit it, fill in the glosses for the morphological forms. But that doesn't address the other associated words. For example, -ness and -ive and -tion and -ful and -ly endings. These are all clearly based on the root word, and part of natural language is adapting my root words into these other parts of speech.

I have two different mechanism I use, depending on whether my starting point is a noun/adjective or a verb. If I'm starting with a noun, I create a verb form that is clearly based on the same root as that noun, but without a specific in-language mechanism for its creation. For example, the word for "awake" (adj.) is briatvo. The verb form I created for "to wake" is bria, which fits my self-imposed phonotactics for verbs. There isn't a productive suffix in the language -tvo, although I might create a few more adjectives with that ending in a similar semantic space. But the two words are clearly connected.

If I start with a verb, then there are already mechanisms built into the language to produce nouns and adjectives. The verbal noun, which acts like a gerund, involves the suffix -kko. Therefore, I get briakko for "waking", gammakko for "cutting", etc. If I want to further derive a noun from the verbal noun, I remove the -ko ending. For example, gammak is "a cut". In general, this form is used to indicating the result of the action of a noun, rather than the action itself.

Another form is the verbal adjective, which is like a past participle. It is an adjective indicating the state of having the action performed. So for example, the adjective "cut" would be gammad, the root verb plus the -d ending.

What about more complicated suffixes? Here are a few examples

cuttable: amu talgammad' "able passive+cut+verbal-adj"

wakeful: fozh briatvo "full-of awake"

soldier (literally, "cutter", one who cuts): gammaza "cut+person-who"

At the moment, I have defined 286 "simple" words, but thanks to these word generation processes, both productive and non-productive (in in-language terms), my total word count is up to 535, and growing.

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki