So, I've just finalized the grammar for my romlang Solmeia, and then I realized that it doesn't fall into the standard classification for a romlang. While the morphology is completely based on Latin, the syntax is entirely different. For example, here are some basic grammatical rules in Solmeia:

• Conjugations indicate tense, aspect, and gender only. The grammatical person is identified by the pronouns used, in most cases.
• The word order of the language is primarily VSO, as opposed to SOV for Latin.
• In Solmeia, OSV is used for passive voice. The infinitive form of a verb is used in this case.
• First person pronouns are always considered to be genderless. The speaker applies whatever extensions to verbs he feels are appropriate. Numbers are considered to be neuter; any neutral suffix can be used.
• The gender and plurality of the verb must match the object. In most cases, the plurality of the subject, if a pronoun, must match the object as well. (Yes, this does cause some ambiguity to arise.)

There's a bunch of other examples, but I can't think of them off the top of my head. Thing is, given what I've done to the grammar, would this language still count as a romlang? Or is it something else now?

This language has three genders, with a mess of suffixes for them all:
Feminine: -e, -i
Masculine: -a, -o, -um
Neuter: -ae, -en, -ia, -in, -io

And the verb conjugations are as follows, for the root ben-, which means good:

benedae → Infinitive
benae → Present simple
benosae → Present imperfective
benuvae → Past simple
benosuvae → Past imperfective
benirae → Future simple
benosirae → Future imperfective
benar/benir → Momentane/prospective
benosqu → Gnomic
benu → Perfective

Here's some sample sentences so you get a better idea:

Bevir egev ilud plut du vain.
VSO <Drink-PROS-NEUT {myself-NEUT} {that more of wine-NEUT4}.>
I could drink more wine than that.

En mi dia so benedae.
OSV <In {my-GEN-NEUT day-NEUT2} {he-MASC2 (myself)} is good-INF-NEUT1.>
I had a good day. (Literally: My day was good to me.)

Vul approvin vonum plut du vain, magister?
VSO <Would approve-PRS-SMP-NEUT4 {you-ACC-MASC3} {more of wine-NEUT4}, sir?>
Would you like some more wine, sir?

Also, here's a little limerick in the language. Enjoy!

An stelli cadenci, quantumienci,
Qu luxar en caelev
Vul aqu unis, reliqu nilis
Qual an desra ov von egev.

(No, I'm not providing IPA for this language. It's a pain in the arse to write. Just pronounce it like you would Latin.)

To be completely honest, some of the grammar I'm actually unsure how to explain, like the difference between the suffixes for genders and when to use/mix them.

Here's some stuff I forgot to add:

Words of comparison (more, after, better, etc.) follow a strict structure, as follows:

object 1 + comparison + of + object 2
Persen podu du egev.
The person after me.
or
comparison + of + object
Plut du vain.
More wine.
or
pronoun + comparison + of + object
Ilud plut du vain.
More wine than that.

If this clause is an object in a sentence, it is used as normal:

Bevir egev plut du vain.
I could drink more wine.

However, if the clause is a subject in a sentence, the clause is moved to the front of the sentence, and represented after the verb by a third-person pronoun (regardless of actual grammatical person), as follows:

Optum du cerviva essosqu sa cerviva brunut.
VSO <Best of beer-MASC1 is-GNOMIC {it-MASC1} {beer-MASC1}.>
The best ale is brown ale.

There are also a few exceptions to the apparent word order rules; some verbs can be used as adjectives. In this case, they come after the noun. For example:

So beno!
<It-MASC2 good-PRS-SMP-MASC2!>
Of course! (Literally: It's good!)

Looks good so far.
This still counts as a romlang. I think the only requirement for a romlang is that it derive most of its vocabulary and some of its grammar from Latin.
May I ask, do I see an adjective functioning as a verb in so beno? I like that. I've never tried using it myself.
I like it, but what does it mean? I see something about stars falling from the sky I think, but can't make out the rest. Please don't tell me I'm just supposed to understand it.
And if IPA is such a pain, you could try using X-SAMPA. The only pain there is memorizing it.

I figured as much. Romanian looks even less Latin-esque!


It could also be considered a verb functioning as an adjective (as specified previously) A lot of the words are interchangeable like that. Fortunately, because of the grammatical structure, it generally doesn't get too confusing... Though you can still get some weird constructs.
Originally, the grammar of this language was quite different. Once I assigned definitions to some of the words, however, certain sentences (such as the passives, or So beno) didn't make sense anymore... But I liked the structure so much that I invented grammar that used 'em.


You probably could understand it, if you spent a good deal of time trying to find the etymology of each word. But for posterity, here's a translation (With rhyming preserved):

A falling star, however far,
When glimpsed up in the sky
Will but once soar, leaving nothing more
Than a wish for you and I.

I was kinda wondering if anyone would try to translate it. Oh well!


With the IPA, I sometimes get mixed up with which vowels I should use. X-SAMPA is easier to type, but I find it harder to read. At any rate, it's mainly because I'm a lazy bat-rastard. Given that the pronunciation is supposed to be like Latin, I find it mostly unnecessary anyway, though some of the vowels do mutate in similar ways to in English.
In fact, here's a transcription of every basic phoneme in the language, just because it's easier than typing it out every time:

a - /a/ or /ɐ/ if stressed, or /æ/ if before an i, or /ə/ if final
b - /b/
c - /k/ or /s/ if followed by an e or i (The latter can also be /θ/ in some dialects)
d - /d/
e - /ə/ or /ɛ/ if stressed, or /e/ if before an i
f - /f/
g - /g/
h - /h/
i - /i/ or /ɪ/ if after another vowel (except a) or a q, or /iː/ if final
j - /dʒ/
k - /k/
l - /l/
m - /m/
n - /n/
o - /o/ or /ɒ/ if stressed, or /oː/ if preceeding an l
p - /p/
q - /kw/ or /kj/ if final (Note: Almost exclusively followed by a u. Where it is not, it becomes /k/ or less often, /g/)
r - /ɹ/ or /r/
s - /s/
t - /t/ (If final, it is silent, e.g. brunut -> /bɹu.ˈnuː/)
u - /u/ or /uː/ if stressed
v - /v/
w - /w/
x - /ks/
y - /j/
z - /z/

Stress usually falls on the second-to-last syllable.

Note that the phonology of this language is liable to change as I add in new vocab. The above is just a general guide. I may have also missed out a rule or two. I'm not sure. If I notice any words that don't adhere to the above rules, I'll point 'em out.

At any rate, thanks for the input! If you have any tips on how to clarify stuff, or any questions about the language, ask away! I shall respond anon.

Sure, but where would I find it? Nobody's got an etymological dictionary for your conlang. I can only guess.
I like it! Thank you. Unfortunately I can't quite figure out how to gloss it. Some other time perhaps.
Well, I'm sorry I couldn't. Trust me, I did try to puzzle it out, but my comprehension of written Romance isn't always anywhere near 100%.
I didn't bother to explain this before, but you can't actually just say "it's like Latin" and have everyone know just what you mean. There are several kinds of Latin pronunciation: Classical Latin, Medieval Latin and Vulgar Latin are the three that come to mind, and there might be others lurking in the cracks. Besides that, I don't know any kind of Latin that's pronounced like Solmeia. You've made many of the sounds far more like English than Latin. Really, you should have said "it's like Latin, English and some other stuff mushed together". Below is my overly detailed dissection of your phonology:
This is seriously English/Portuguesey. Latin only has /a/ and /a:/ for <a>. (And how about <ae>? What do you do with that?)

By the way, before we go any farther, you might want to know that you use [brackets] for realizations/phones, which is what you have here, and /slashes/ only for phonemes. Sorry to pick nits.
Afraid I don't feel like digging up IPA right now, but in Latin the only pronunciations of <c> are [k] and [tS]. CL only has [k].
Again, I have no idea what the schwa is doing in there. Latin didn't have any.
Nobody really knows if Latin had /h/ <h>, but it's probably best to avoid it if you want a realistic romlang as it didn't survive into any modern Romance languages I know of.
In Latin it was /j/.
Are you sure this is part of the alphabet> Is it only in loanwords, or not?
I see many many lax stressed [allophones] (not /phonemes/) on your list. Why is this? I'd expect it to be the other way round, with lax vowels being the reduced versions. It's also kind of weird if you have [E] but then [ɒ] rather than [O], isn't it?
I don't quite understand. I think what you mean is that <qu> is [kju] when final and [kw] elsewhere, and that <q> is [k] or [g]. If this is wrong, please clarify what you meant.
Please tell me, why can it be [ɹ]?! What an unusual and hard sound that is! What even determines where it appears anyway?
Probably only used in loanwords. You sure it can't be a vowel?
It's more unusual for this not to ever be a vowel.
Are there rules for determining the exceptions? Where can exceptional stress fall?
No problem. My pleasure. Thanks for the conlang.
Will do.

The lexicon is almost entirely derived from Classical Latin. If it's not, it's probably because I couldn't find a word for it. I haven't really determined the exact reasons why some of the words change the way they do yet; mostly, it's just done for flavor at the moment.


I say Latin, because when most people hear "Latin", they think Classical Latin. It's the only one they know. For linguistic people, I suppose I should be more specific. I tend to write for the layman a lot, so do forgive me for this. As for pronunciation, the phonology was originally 99% identical to Latin. It only mutated after I introduced more and more words. Like I said, I did notice afterwards that a lot of my vowels ended up very English-y. Any derivations from actual Latin pronunciation are probably an artifact of my own personal pronunciation of words.


I would agree with the origin assessment. I have a little trouble with differentiating vowels sometimes, so these might not be 100% accurate. As for <ae>... Well... I didn't go over diphthongs for a reason. I haven't entirely sorted them out yet. Right now, that group would be pronounced [eɪ], but that's too English-y for me and I kind of want to change it.


No worries! I do believe we've been over this before though. To me, however, the distinction between phones and phonemes isn't exactly 100% clear. I get mixed up sometimes, so I've just been using [ ] for dialectial pronunciation (except where I forget, which I obviously did here) and / / for everything else. I'm still working on it!


I know this. I took some inspiration from modern Italian and Spanish here.


I have no idea what the schwa is doing in there either. To be fairly honest, I stuck it in there because I wasn't completely sure what vowel sound I was making and that appeared to be closest. I'm thinking about it again, however, and found some cases where that rule isn't followed. Probably best to replace the [ə] with a [ɛ].


I just listed the whole Latin alphabet because I wasn't sure what was used or not. I think it's a fair assumption to say that <h> became <s> in most cases for Classical Latin. The letter exists, at any rate, it just probably isn't used for anything except names.


This letter isn't actually used in Solmeia, so it's there for names only. Given that in Solmeia all incidences of <y> as a vowel were replaced with <i> (And therefore <y> is /j/), I found it fair to put in the modern English sound as a placeholder.


This is part of the alphabet in Solmeia, though its usage is rare. It is used only when needing a /k/ preceeding an <e> or <i>.


As previously mentioned, I'm still working on the differentiation between [ ] and / /. I'll get there. As for the actual question itself... I don't know how to answer it. Could you perhaps explain what you mean a little more clearly? Like, how is it weird? Given that in Solmeia it is [ˈɒk.ta] and not [ˈok.ta]... Well, yeah. I don't have every word in the language transcribed into IPA, so some of my rules might be not-so-accurate. I also don't know what you mean by [E] and [O].


I screwed up the description of that rule a little bit. Yes, <qu> is [kju] when final, but it also occurs in other places. For example, <qul> is [kjul] and not [kwul]. If there was a vowel following the <u>, such as in <qual> it becomes [kwual] rather than [kjual]. <q> on its own is [k] or [g]; it was adapted this way for loanwords, but is sometimes used as a replacement for k or g. For the most part, it becomes a g if followed by an <o>.

Is that sarcasm? You're joking, right? [ɹ] is incredibly easy to pronounce. Basically, it's used when a word becomes too difficult to articulate. For the average Solmeian speaker, I imagine this would be whenever <r> is part of a consonant cluster. On its own it becomes [r]. This is not always the case though. I don't have a solid rule for when which is used; I might not ever, besides a pronunciation guide for individual words.

I haven't actually used this letter yet, so I don't know. It's probably only for loanwords, given that it's actually derived from Germanic sounds.

I don't like having a letter that acts as both a vowel and a consonant. "How many vowels does your language have?" "Uhh... Five and a half." Also, its use as a vowel has been supplanted by <i>. I consider this to be a possible mutation of a language over the course of centuries.

I haven't solidified this yet. At the moment, I have a secondary (tentative) rule that the stress is on the second to last syllable of the root and not the actual word. Hence, <benedo> would become [ˈbɛ.nə.do] and not [bə.ˈnɛ.do].

I always enjoy your input! You have a knack for pointing out inconsistencies that I otherwise would have overlooked. It makes me think about my conlang!

Note: Oh, I forgot to gloss my limerick for you! I'm actually out of time now, though, so I'll do that later for ya.

All right, here's the gloss of my limerick, as promised. Hope it's up to scratch!

An stelli cad-enc-i, quantumi-enc-i,
<A(N) star(F2) fall-ADJ-F2, however.much-ADJ-F2>
A falling star, however far

Qu lux-ar en caelev
<When shine-MMT in sky(N)>
When it shined in the sky

Vul aqu unis, reliqu nilis
<Will_be but once, relinquish-PRF nothing>
Will be but once, having relinquished nothing

Qual an desra ov von egev.
<Than a desire(M1) for you(N) I(N).>
Than a desire for you and I.

Note that the numbers above indicate which gender extension used, not the grammatical person. Some leniency was also given for artistic use with certain grammar, such as the standard VSO order. There's also no words for 'the' or 'and' in Solmeia.
There's no guide to indicating what word order means in the gloss, so for clarification, the first half of the poem is passive (the existence of the falling star) and the rest is active (the wish it left behind).

You know, I'm not so sure of this. I think most people are more familiar with Medieval Latin than CL, aren't they? I for one only learned anything about CL pronunciation after I started my lessons in it, and I don't think I'm an especially atypical sample. But you may have something else in mind when you say 'CL'.
Sure, sure.
I find it interesting that you construct your phonology largely according to how you end up pronouncing things rather than doing it the other way round. If I took that approach, I'd end up with all sorts of ridiculous constraints such as no voiced stops permitted in initial position (which I suspect may also be a rule of Solmeia, since you're also a native English speaker). I do try to fit phonologies to what I can actually produce, but there is a certain limit and I don't like to have to play by it.
What do you mean?
[eɪ], [e:] or [ɛ] would be fine for <ae>.
Quite possibly.
I see. I'm not especially clear on phones vs. phonemes myself, but I'll try to explain if you don't mind.
If two sounds contrast, they are phonemes and would be represented differently inside slashes. If they do not contrast, they are phones and represented the same inside slashes and differently in brackets. For example, suppose you have a language with the three vowel phonemes /a i u/. They are realized respectively as [ɑ e o] when following the consonant /q/, but as [a i u] elsewhere. Let's say we have two words, /aku/ and /aqu/. They would be realized as [aku] and [aqo] according to the rules we've just set up. It might seem like [o] and [u] contrast, but what actually contrasts is the consonant because *[ako] and *[aqu] do not occur.
Did that make sense?
Good, so we've got that established.
If you want to you should.
I don't understand. Do you mean that <h> became <s> in CL or in words derived from it? Either way, /h/ > /s/ is a strange sound change as it usually goes the other way. (I'm not conflating spelling with pronunciation, I'm just inferring pronunciation from spelling.)
I see. Just like Brithenig.
I'm sorry. I wasn't very clear, was I? Let me try to explain better.
By [E] and [O] I meant [ɛ] and [ɔ].
[ɛ ɔ ɪ ʊ] (not sure why I put them in brackets) are generally considered lax vowels as opposed to [e o i u] which are tense. This basically means that the tongue is higher for the latter set and the former are lower and more central. Said lax vowels are often unstressed or "short" allophones of the tense vowels, but in Solmeia they are stressed allophones instead. Similarly, [ɐ] tends to be an unstressed allophone of /a/.
As for the last thing I said, my point was that it's a little strange to have [ɛ] as the allophone of /e/ but [ɒ] rather than [ɔ] as the allophone of /o/. Either it's strange or it's Englishy.
Okay, makes sense up to here.
But why isn't it [kwal]? Is <qu> never [kw]?
I see. Why does /o/ turn <q> into [g]?
I'm deadly serious.
For people like you and me of course /ɹ/ is easy, but that's only because we've been pronouncing it our whole lives. Non-natives and young children have significantly more trouble. I personally know an almost-seven-year-old who almost always realizes /ɹ/ as [w], just for one example.
Since /ɹ/ is in general more difficult to pronounce than /r/ (I think -- correct me if I'm wrong), and they're both relatively difficult sounds, I'd not expect the rule to be as you've described it.
Sounds good to me. Can the last syllable ever be stressed? It looks like it can't.
Aww, thanks.

Isn't Classical Latin what they teach at University, speak at Fraternities, etc.? Hence people would be more familiar with it due to media exposure. That's my thought, at any rate. Unless that's actually Medieval Latin and I'm mistaken. Then I've been talking about (and learning) the wrong thing this whole bloody time.


No voiced stops in an initial position? I... Find that an odd feature that you'd encounter, given that English has heaps of them (if I'm interpreting what you said correctly). Usually I do a combination of both, though; I have a set phonology for a language, and as I make up words, I try different pronunciations and see which ones adhere to the given phones and allophones. If the word doesn't fit, but I particularly like it, I may add it on top, or as an exception. When I'm trying to make words for an a priori conlang, however, I don't find my native language is much of a barrier.


That the vowel phonology looks very Portuguese-y and English-y.


Yup! I just have to remember to use it.


Oops, sometimes I write things down without thinking. I meant that if one were to look at Classical Latin as if it were a language derived from Greek, one would notice that words that used to have an H had that letter replaced with an S. At least, in initial positions. The phonology doesn't really match up with this, of course, so it's more of an artifact of derived alphabets more than anything else.


So basically, my stress/unstress is backwards as compared to the norm. That's nice to know. It's probably just English-y. The phonology, as I said, is a mere draft, and there is a lot that I'll probably change. For example, the stressed <a> I noticed in some words is [æ]. So right now it's a mish-mash of everything, and the rules I wrote down are the most common that I could find.
As for the [ɒ] instead of [ɔ]... Well, that's probably just me having trouble distinguishing the vowels. I need to figure out some standard pronunciation guide, rather than relying on my own mouth to articulate the words.


I mostly had the <u> in there for clarity. It is mostly redundant, though I suppose there could be a dialect that pronounces it like that. [kwal] is perfectly valid.


This commonly occurs in CL and VL writing. It's not a solid rule, obviously.


I do suppose with some people /ɹ/ turns into /w/ and /l/ (Which weally iwks me.). I feel this depends largely on what culture you belong to, though. A native speaker of Cantonese, for example (Which contains no rhotic consonants, to my knowledge), I suspect would have an equally difficult time learning any rhotic consonant. In my personal experience, however, I had more trouble learning /r/ than /ɹ/. As previously mentioned, the main idea behind the allophone was that it was to be used where the standard pronunciation [r] is more difficult to articulate than its approximant allophone, ie. in certain consonant clusters such as <tr>. (I often end up turning this into [t͡ɕl] if I try to roll it.)
Regardless, you do have a point; as a native speaker of English, I am biased. I'm not entirely sure I can help it though.


I have some words with a secondary stress on the last syllable, and some words with primary stress on the last syllable. It is there, just uncommon. I may also have the stress dependent on dialect in the future.

So many nested quotes lol...

I can't say for sure. I think ML is generally better known; I'm not sure about media exposure, university/college, fraternities, etc., but ML is definitely the one used in churches whereas (I think) CL is the one taught in lessons. Here are some differences so maybe we can figure out what you're thinking of by 'CL':
- ML has 'soft' c and g ([tS dZ]) before e and i; CL does not. Similarly, in ML 'soft' <sc> is [S] (< [StS] < [stS]) and soft <xc> is [kS] (< [kStS]), whereas in CL <sc> is [sk] and <xc> is [ksk].
- In ML, <ae> is [e:] (IIRC) whereas in CL it is [ai].
- IN ML <v> is [v] whereas in CL it is [w]. Similarly, ML has <j> (probably variable in pronunciation depending on who you ask), which CL does not have.
That's all I can think of. Does that clarify anything?
English may have phonemic voiced stops in initial position, but they tend to be realized as partially or fully devoiced. I tend to run to the fully devoiced with both stops and fricatives when not intervocalic, so any phonology based on my way of speaking would probably incorporate this feature.
Okay, I think I see.
I see what you were trying to say, but where does Greek come into the picture with Solmeia? (I'm sure you know that Latin isn't derived from Greek.)
I see.
That's understandable; I don't think there are too many kinds of American English that have the two as separate phonemes. It took me a while to get that too.
That might be a good idea, yes.
Do you mean the <u> or the [u]? I'm slightly confused.
How can a pronunciation not reflected in the spelling occur in writing? What do you mean?
Indeed! The next post will have to get rid of a few because you can't nest more than 3.