Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mini – The Minimal Language

minilanguage.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#61

Post by boerseth »

tsuujin wrote: post #24
roetlich wrote: post #21

> The vowels are pronounced like they are in Spanish, Italian, German, and many other languages ... ok, this is annoying. Can't speak for Italian and Spanish, but in German vowels are pronounced differently depending on context. Later, it says the 'o' is meant to be pronounced like in "moment". Moment is pronounced differently in American and UK English. And neither are like Italian "momento" or like German "Moment".…

The article doesn’t say it, but the pronunciation is identical to Japanese, which I am fond of in general. In college Japanese class we were taught the phrase “ah, we soon get old” for a, i, u, e, and o respectively. I found it to be simple and satisfying.

That clarifies a bit, but still leaves me confused at some of the choices made.

Why include both sounds "r" and "l", when they can be tricky to distinguish for some speakers, and then use Japanese as pronunciation guide? The sounds "m/n" are also easy to mix up. Same with "b/v", which are pretty much interchangeable to a lot of Spanish speakers. I think the number of consonants could have been reduced considerably.

I like how the language flows though. It seems like a goal has been to avoid consonant clusters. It feels kind of like Swahili, though I don't speak that at all. The only input I would have on this point is that the verb/noun/adjective markers "i/a/e" would be hard to distinguish against words ending in a vowel, which seems to happen a lot. In rapid speech I see that becoming a problem that would cause it to flow less well, or breed forth a need for a de facto fixed word order for clarity.

What if every word started with a consonant and ended in a vowel, including those three markers? What if we completely got rid of problem pairs like "rl/mn/bv", by removing one or both in each pair? Could we get by using mainly voiced consonants? I kind of want to fork this project and try it out.

To be clear, while I am being critical in this comment, I want to explicitly say also that it is an impressive job to have made a new language, and refine it to this level of minimalism. Perhaps I am wary after having "wasted" a lot of time on Esperanto.

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#62

Post by [deleted] »

Aeolun wrote: post #53
int_19h wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In pretty much any language there's no single point on the vowel chart that actually identifies a vowel - it's a spectrum with numerous allophones. Conlangs like this one are generally constructed in such a way as to allow maximally wide spectrum that is still distinctive. So if you pronounce it the way you speak English, that's still fine. If you want more precision, generally speaking, the value of the character in…

You are going to get a lot of weirdness mixing a, e end i up.

[deleted]

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#63

Post by Dylan16807 »

msla wrote: post #54
roetlich wrote: post #21

> The vowels are pronounced like they are in Spanish, Italian, German, and many other languages ... ok, this is annoying. Can't speak for Italian and Spanish, but in German vowels are pronounced differently depending on context. Later, it says the 'o' is meant to be pronounced like in "moment". Moment is pronounced differently in American and UK English. And neither are like Italian "momento" or like German "Moment".…

> All of the consonants (b d f g j k l m n p r s t v) are pronounced exactly the same as they are in English. Phew! "T" as in "Trent" is the same as "T" as in "butter" for this person? "S" as in "pass" is the same as "S" as in "passion" too? "G" as in "go" is the same as "G" as in "gel" as well? There's a reason humans invented the IPA.

That sounds like they mean the default pronunciation, and those are pretty clear.

C and G have some ambiguity, but they didn't include C and it should be obvious that G is not going to be the same as J.

> There's a reason humans invented the IPA.

99% of people can't use IPA without an example chart.

But also: "Each letter matches its International Phonetic Alphabet pronunciation with the exception of J, which is the English /dʒ/."

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#65

Post by swiftcoder »

Aeolun wrote: post #53
int_19h wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In pretty much any language there's no single point on the vowel chart that actually identifies a vowel - it's a spectrum with numerous allophones. Conlangs like this one are generally constructed in such a way as to allow maximally wide spectrum that is still distinctive. So if you pronounce it the way you speak English, that's still fine. If you want more precision, generally speaking, the value of the character in…

You are going to get a lot of weirdness mixing a, e end i up.

That's true going between English and Romance languages anyway

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#67

Post by nine_k »

eru wrote: post #52
masukomi wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not saying those papers are wrong, but 136 years and millions of speakers from _most_ countries and Esperanto's speakers seem just fine without adding irregular verbs.

Turkish might be a better example: it's a real, natural language and highly regular.

Same with Japanese, apparently a completely unrelated, differently structured language.

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#68

Post by nine_k »

boerseth wrote: post #61
tsuujin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article doesn’t say it, but the pronunciation is identical to Japanese, which I am fond of in general. In college Japanese class we were taught the phrase “ah, we soon get old” for a, i, u, e, and o respectively. I found it to be simple and satisfying.

That clarifies a bit, but still leaves me confused at some of the choices made. Why include both sounds "r" and "l", when they can be tricky to distinguish for some speakers, and then use Japanese as pronunciation guide? The sounds "m/n" are also easy to mix up. Same with "b/v", which are pretty much interchangeable to a lot of Spanish speakers. I think the number of consonants could have been reduced considerably. I…

If you noticed, a ton of lexical material in Mini comes from Germanic and Romance languages, so even basic knowledge of English / German / Spanish / French is immediately helpful. Ditching the R/L distinction, or B/V distinction, or M/N distinction would kill most of this familiarity.

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#69

Post by int_19h »

Aeolun wrote: post #53
int_19h wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In pretty much any language there's no single point on the vowel chart that actually identifies a vowel - it's a spectrum with numerous allophones. Conlangs like this one are generally constructed in such a way as to allow maximally wide spectrum that is still distinctive. So if you pronounce it the way you speak English, that's still fine. If you want more precision, generally speaking, the value of the character in…

You are going to get a lot of weirdness mixing a, e end i up.

Yeah, I mixed up two unrelated things that I shouldn't have They don't recommend using English as a guide for vowels for that exact reason - it's one of the most nonsensical orthographies in that respect. But the website only says "like English" for consonants, where it kinda sorta works (although they forgot to say that "g" is always hard).

Re: Mini – The Minimal Language

#70

Post by totetsu »

It tickled me to see a changelog for a language there, so i had GPT write one for English too.

Change Log for English Language Evolution

Version 1.0: Proto-English (450 CE)

    Initial release of Proto-English, a West Germanic language spoken by Anglo-Saxon tribes.
    Basic grammar and vocabulary established.
    Development primarily led by "Linguistic Trailblazers."
Version 1.1: Viking Invasion Patch (850 CE)

    Introducing Old Norse influence due to Viking invasions.
    Added Norse loanwords and grammatical structures.
    Integration efforts led by the "Language Fusion Guild."
Version 2.0: The Great Vowel Shift (1400 CE)

    Major phonological update affecting long vowels and diphthongs.
    Unprecedented vowel sound migrations across the language.
    Executed by the "Phonetic Alchemists Consortium."
Version 2.1: Shakespearean Lexical Expansion (1600 CE)

    Extensive vocabulary enrichment, drawing inspiration from literary works by William Shakespeare.
    Introduction of numerous idiomatic expressions.
    Collaborative effort involving "Poetic Linguists Guild."
Version 3.0: British Empire Localization (1800 CE)

    Localization effort to adapt English for various regions within the British Empire.
    Incorporation of local dialects and vocabulary.
    Localization project overseen by the "Imperial Language Commission."
Version 4.0: American Revolution Fork (1776 CE)

    Creation of American English variant with notable vocabulary and spelling differences.
    Introduction of simplified grammar rules and new expressions.
    Led by the "Patriotic Language Architects."
Version 5.0: Globalization Update (20th Century)

    English becomes an international language due to global interactions.
    Inclusion of loanwords and phrases from various languages.
    A collaborative effort by the "Cultural Linguistic Exchange Taskforce."
Version 6.0: Digital Age Upgrade (Late 20th Century)

    Vocabulary expansion to encompass computer science and technology terms.
    Introduction of internet slang and acronyms.
    Driven by the "Cyber Lexicographers Consortium."
Version 7.0: Modern Dialect Divergence (21st Century)

    Increasing divergence between regional dialects due to globalization and migration.
    Emergence of unique vocabulary and idiomatic expressions in different English-speaking communities.
    Monitored by the "Dialectologists Guild."
Post reply on HN