I mean... the main characteristics that define this kind of construction.

So using the Dative case of Vera in this sentence, Does this: Вере здесь неинтересно.

Translate to:

Vera here is uninteresting, or

Here is uninteresting to Vera.

Here's what I mean - let's take an english phrase "the color of the door", in German you can write "die Farbe der Tuer" and that's legal as I understand it.

But what if you want to write "the color of the door of the house", can you stack datives to write "die Farbe der Tuer dem Haus"?

Is that legal or would a German start chasing you shouting "SYNTAX ERROR"

As to why I would want to do such a thing, I was thinking about creating a programming language based on German grammar. Don't ask why, I'm bored.

Hello r/conlangs!
This is my first time posting here as I haven't really needed help with my conlang so far, but I'm slightly paranoid about making too alike to other languages.

For some background to give context:

>I am currently constructing a language for a community that I'm apart of. We've been planning to do this for some time (around 3 years), and pretty much everyone's eager to start learning and speak it within our community, but haven't really gotten to it yet, mainly because of my indecisiveness.
For about a month now, I've actively been working on the language and it's been going very smoothly.
However, as the language is supposed to be a language-isolate (completely unrelated to any language, be it a natural one or another conlang), I've felt a bit scared that I might be making it a bit too Eurocentrict.
>
>This is mainly because I only speak indo-european languages, namely; English, German, and I'm currently learning Armenian. I will also be learning Hungarian, which I already have a lot of daily exposure to, so that is the only non-indo-european language in my shelf, however even Hungarian has a lot of influence from indo-european languages due to contact with them, so it's not perfect.

Like I said,
as this conlang is meant to be a language-isolate, I'd like to avoid euro-centrism, or well any language-centrism.
I am very very careful with what I add and remove from the language, as I like to think about every minute detail, which is why it's taken me over a month to decide on all the grammatical cases for example.

I suppose I'll write out a list of all the current features the language has so it's easier to judge and possibly help me out with my question.

List of (almost) all the current grammatical features [also including other important details]:

> ● The language's words are all completely unrelated to any language.
● It has 39 sounds, 12 vowels and 27 consonants.
● Its word order is free and not set, with the only rule being that adjectives & adverbs remain next to the word they're describing.
● It has no grammatical gender.
● It has has 4 genders (Neuter, Male, Female and Inanimate).
● It only has a definite article.
● Personal pronouns have clusivity (separating inclusion and exclusion of listener), and also a possessive, dispossessive and neutral form.
● Verbs (and sentences as a whole) are able to be said without any reference to time at all.

Hello,

Sorry I don't really know how to ask this question so please, be patient with me.

When I learned German, I got in the habit of learning the verbs with the cases they govern, for example I would learn

"jemandem etwas geben". (jemandem allowed me to know its dative and etwas accusatif)

For that I used pronouns because it's easier to memorize than trying to remember the cases.

What would be the right pronouns to use in Russian to achieve the same result? Would for example

"давать кому-то что-то" to remember dative, accusative

"заниматься чем-то" to remember instrumental

be the right way to learn the verb with the needed cases or it there a better formula?

Are there any extant (classical) examples of an impersonal predicative gerundive being used without a dative of agent (or any other kind of dative)? For example, "Eundum est" = It is necessary to go. "Romā discedendum erit" = There will be an obligation to leave Rome.

I'm imagining this in a context where it's obvious who has the obligation, and so it's left implied, but I could also see it as a way to be intentionally vague or general. It seems to me to be a fairly straightforward application of the gerundive, but I'm wondering if we have examples of it, from the classical period in particular. Sorry if this is a common thing, I'm a noob at gerundives and haven't been able to find an example myself yet.

Now, why am I writing this? Mostly honestly, I just had to take my mother to the hospital yesterday and so I need something to distract myself without it necessarily being 'cheery'. Besides, I honestly enjoy doing research papers, and often wish I could take an intellectual job, but I don't have the money for a degree. I've been thinking that perhaps I could just do it for the sheer pleasure of it, and also to expand my own knowledge.

Anyway, I typed this out in a word document just now, and did a single proof-read of it. As I explained in the paper, German has some interesting features that could be used in a conlang, but despite this is rarely taken as a source of inspiration. I happen to be an intermediate in the language, so I know it quite well. Here I tried to summarize the parts that may be of interest to a conlanger, most notably I skipped over things like phonology and semantics. The whole document is a little over 3 pages long in word (double spaced), so hopefully it isn't that long of a read.

So, without further ado, here's what I came up with:

A Summary of German Grammar

Purpose:

The purpose of this paper isn't to teach the language, or give a detailed analysis of it. The purpose of writing this is to summarize the details of German that may be of interest for a conlanger. German has a number of rather unique features, but is rarely drawn upon when conlanging. Thus I am writing this so that someone could get learn about some of the strangeness of German grammar without having to read that much.

Noun Phrases:

The order of a noun phrase is: preposition-determiner-adjective-noun-adjectival clause

German distinguishes four cases, which are as follows:

Nominative: the subject

Accusative: direct object

Dative: indirect object

Genitive: possessive

Prepositions require the noun to be in a specific case depending on the preposition in question. Some, can take one of two cases which results in a change of meaning. The accusative indicates motion towards, while the dative indicates location. For instance, with the German preposition 'in', with the accusative it means 'into' but with the dative it means 'in' or 'inside of'.

Case is primarily marked on the article/determiner. Adjectives take their own markings depending on case, gender, number, and whether a definite or indefinite article is present. The adjectival endings used for when no article is present are the only ones detailed enough to determine case.

There is a fair a

A lot of you are probably familiar with one of the many famous lines from Shakespeare's "Hamlet": "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I had never given the "methinks" part of this much thought as I assumed it to be a colloquial way of saying "I think." And it certainly is, but there's a subtle difference and some interesting linguistic history buried there. From Merriam-Webster:

Middle English me thinketh, from Old English mē thincth, from mē (dative of ic I) + thincth seems, from thyncan to seem

So if I'm understanding correctly, "methinks" is an archaic analogue to "me parece" in Spanish. It's a minor point but it's interesting to know we have an Old English dative case buried in an expression like this, and that the "thinks" part of it did not actually mean "think".

Finally, a bit of related dialogue from "Cheers" for those of you who remember that show...

Diane: Methinks the man does protest too much.

Woody:Excuse me, Miss Chambers, but shouldn't it be "I thinks?"

Carla: Not in your case, Woody.

Inspired by this post by u/QueenAnyaTheSnark, today I'm going to explore the usage of the vocative in my conlang Zevy.

There are two prefixes commonly used to create the vocative: do- /do/, which marks the second person, and dese- /deze/, which marks the first person plural. Here are some examples:

Examples of vocative phrases in Zevy

Phonetic transcription of the examples of vocative phrases

As seen from the examples, the pronunciation of the morpheme to which these prefixes attach is often reduced.

Jumping in further, I'll note that strictly speaking, these aren't simply vocative forms but are rather noun phrases that act as pronouns. Or by another name, pronominals.

As such, they can appear anywhere in a sentence. For example:

Deu mu, mata te at? Dovund mu at.
[ˈzeomə ˈmatətsa ↗︎ ǀ ˈdovðma ↘︎]
deu mu, mata te at ? do-vund mu at
INT ABS, park DAT go ? 2-friend ABS go
"Who is going to the park? You, friend, are going."

Ha me dovund tedu rese mu moema.
[ˈha me ˈdovð tjed ˌreze m̩ ’moj(ə)mə]
ha me do-vund tedu rese mu mo-ema
RSMP LOC 2-friend at_house_of arrive ABS IMP-say
"Tell me when you get home, friend."

Vedesetritiis te make mu vemet hi me utnaka.
[ˈβedezetris əts ˈmake m̩ ˌβemeh ji me ˈh(ə)nakə]
ve=dese-tritiis te make mu ve-met hi me naka
NEG-1p-student DAT respect ABS NEG.AGR-put SUBJ.AGR.2 PRS teacher
"The teacher doesn't respect us students."

Similar pronominals exist in the third person with the prefixes da-, ut-, and ne-. I won't go deeply into those in this post, but here are some quick examples:

Danaka ti zo hi me?
[ˈdanakə h ˌzo j me]
"Do you see that teacher? (over there)"

Det, utnaka mu, deu?
[ˈdeh ˈh(ə)nakə mə ˈzeo]
"Yes, what about that teacher? (that you just mentioned)"

Utnaka mu, nenaka temu hat: avaven!
[ˈh(ə)nakə mə ˈɲenakə tem hah ǀ ˈwaβaβə]
"That teacher is taller than this teacher (that I'm about to mention): your dad!"

Utnaka te det.
[ˈh(ə)nakə ts deh]
"Good for them."

So, these prefixes extend beyond the second

OK, so I'm a native English speaker and German is the first TL I've ever had to learn. So that's to say that grammatical cases are an entirely alien concept to me.

I have studied about the definition and uses of all 4 grammatical cases, and when I'm doing exercises in my textbook I'm mostly correct. But anything outside of that and I haven't much of a clue what case I should use.

For context I do understand the cases most of the time when I'm hearing/reading them, my brain just kind of treats it like an article. But I'd be absolutely hopeless if anyone asked me what case I should use.

Everyone says to learn the gender of a word and I did, it started off similar to cases where I could understand what was being said but outside of textbook exercises struggled to know which to use. But mostly i've noticed that further along in my learning, the more I have a "feel" for what gender is correct. Are cases the same? Is it something that is just going to click one day? Or do I need to beat myself over the head with a textbook with reciting the definitions and what verbs use what cases?

I’m vaguely aware of various aspects of Russian grammar that might be used here, but I can’t quite put it all together. I think dative case would be used to say “for”, then I’m aware of the “у вас” or whatever sort of construction for possession (I’m not totally sure how to use this construction; I’m also aware of матери meaning “mother’s” possessive but don’t know how to use it). but I really can’t figure it out.

One unique grammatical feature of my as-yet-unnamed conlang is the use of the vocative case in an imperative sense. In essence, addressing someone by the vocative form of anything other than their own name, title, or relation to oneself is an emphatic command to conform in some way to the word one used. Combined with two uses of the obligatory mood^(1), this creates three levels of imperative constructions, with the imperative vocative as the most emphatic.

Since I am focusing on grammar before lexicon, I lack several necessary words to write fully-translated examples, and will thus present examples in parsed form.

The imperative vocative is commonly used with characteristics or states of being...

><quiet-allative^(2)&gt; <be-second plural continuous^(3) active obligatory> = "You should be quiet."
>
><be-second plural continuous active obligatory> <quiet-allative> = "Be quiet" or "Quiet down"
>
><quiet-vocative plural> = "SILENCE!"

...though it can also be used with locations.

><room-allative> <you-dative^(4)&gt; <go-second singular perfect^(5) active obligatory> = "You should go to your room."
>
><go-second singular perfect active obligatory> <room-allative> <you-dative> = "Go to your room."
>
><room-vocative> = "GO TO YOUR ROOM!"

This particular use of the vocative may trace its roots to the loss of an adjectival case^(6). If true, most functions of the adjectival case would have been added to the genitive (e.g. genitive of material, genitive description), with the specific case of commanding someone to be a certain way being at least partially folded into the vocative. Initial examples may also have included elements of verbal irony that became increasingly sincere (not to mention heated) as the usage became more common.

^(1) The obligatory mood, naturally, conveys obligation. Though it can be used in an imperative sense, it is also commonly used to express advice (e.g. "you should practice more often"), necessity (e.g. "she needs to feed the cat") or regret (e.g. "I should have done this earlier"), all of which follow the language's typical SOV word order. In the present or future, this can also be read as a "soft" imperative (which can most likely be either polite or passive-aggressive). The actual imperative is formed by moving the verb to the beginning of the sentence for emphasis.

^(2) The allative, ablative, and locative case

Just a little heads up before I ask my question, I'll write my post in English but feel free to respond in Spanish :)

So, I'm reading the book El Alquimista right now and in it the following phrase appears:

"Ya no tengo miedo de nada, porque fueron estas señales las que te trajeron a mí."

There's nothing to misunderstand about this phrase in itself, it's perfectly clear, but then I started wondering about the 'te trajeron a mí' part. I'd like to remove the 'a mí' part and replace it with 'me', but I think I've come to the conclusion that I can't. First, just to get the basics out of the way, 'te me trajeron' is correct Spanish, right? Then, looking at for example 'te lo trajeron' (they brought it/him to you) and assuming 'te me trajeron' works analogous to this, 'te me trajeron' would mean 'they brought me to you', right?

I would've then perhaps expected that 'me te trajeron' would mean 'they brought you to me', but I already know the 'me te' combination isn't possible because of the example that 'te me acercas' is totally fine, 'me te acerco' isn't and it should be 'me acerco a ti'.

I guess my questions are:

1. Is a construction like 'te me trajeron' correct/understood/actually used Spanish?

2. If it is, does it only mean 'me trajeron a ti', or could it possibly also be interpreted as 'te trajeron a mí'?

3. Say we'd instead be talking about the phrase 'they brought you to him', no way that'd be something like 'le te trajeron', right? That sounds godawful. That would be 'te trajeron a él', right?

And a bonus question:

4. I heard the phrase 'parece que te me fui' (yes, I'm 100% sure it's not 'parece que te me fuiste', it says 'parece que te me fui' in the singer's officialy published lyrics) in a reggaeton song and because it's reggaeton I'm a bit wary of it being ungrammatical, so could someone clarify if 'parece que te me fui' is indeed correct Spanish? If it is, what does it mean? Looking at the context in the song, it would make sense if it meant 'parece que me fui de ti'. Does it indeed mean this? Could you then also say 'te me alejo' instead of 'me alejo de ti'? Or maybe even 'te me acerco' instead of 'me acerco a ti'?

I apologize for the many, many questions and many, many, many thanks in advance to any of you trying to answer them!! :D

When does sprechen take the accusative? I'm pretty sure I've always seen it with mit + dative, like in English (except perhaps in "wir sprechen uns"). Is this a special construct with müssen or can I apply it liberally, e.g., ich habe ihn gesprochen, ich werde ihn sprechen, etc.?

I was thinking about this. This is just an example sentence. Normally I'd just say something like feminae pulchriores sunt ubi nudae, but a passive verb is important because the thing I want to analyze is pulchrae's role.

Take the English phrase "women are made beautiful with naked bodies". I know this phrase is unnatural, but it says that women, not yet beautiful, are made so when they are nude. It works.

To express that idea in Latin I instinctively used the construct:

subject + passive verb + adjective + agent

feminae + factae sunt + pulchrae + corporibus nudis

Because of the passive sunt there is an intuition in me that says it works like "feminae sunt pulchrae", which says that "women are beautiful" despite the fact feminae can go with pulchrae. If we change the word order we can get "feminae pulchrae sunt", as in "beautiful women are [something]". But when reading the sentence in the title I see no reason to separate pulchrae from feminae. Is word order relevant here?

There is a difference between "beautiful women are made through X" and "women are made beautiful through X", even if the distinction is a subtle one. In order to convey the former what form should pulchra be in? Perhaps dative? Ad + ablative(to the beauty, perhaps)? Is it already correct, or is the sentence just not the correct equivalent?

Hey! In my spare time I'm working on a highly agglutinative minlang that, with less than 1k roots and only basic grammar (four declensions, four tenses, and basically only three parts of speech: nouns+adjectives, verbs and particles) would cover most of everyday conversations – and hopefully much more, even though an astrophysics textbook seems out of reach:). It's a lot of fun trying to not only make up creative shortcuts that would make an artificial language, well, useful, but also trying to balance the weirdness and keep it simple to learn. I've asked a couple of months ago about the (typical in the PIE languages) three persons verb inflection, looking for ways to simplify it and break it down and you've given me quite a lot of ideas, so here I am with yet another open question – what do you do with reflexive verbs (and, somehow, impersonal verbs that seem to me to be loosely connected)?

The grammar of my minlang is supposed to be terribly regular (but then – boring and repetitive). But then the point is to also leave a lot of space for being creative, poetic, having one's own style of speaking etc. What I did not take into account was reflexivity and I supposed that it would be, most of the time, self-explanatory. "He cleans and then he goes to sleep" would basically imply he washes himself and he puts himself to sleep, while the same phrase with an accusative noun (there are four basic cases: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative) would mean, e.g., "He cleans the house(acc) and puts the kids(acc) to sleep(inf)".

But then, introducing the reflexive pronoun (-self, Latin/French se etc.) has a lot of pros and only some cons. It would make the language cleaner, more logical, but also more repetitive. It would make some verbs more productive and introduce fancy ambiguities where they're welcome, but it'd also mean there was a fixed list of reflexive verbs (where either a reflexive pronoun or some object is obligatory) to memorize. In my own language there's a fancy construction – you can add the reflexive pronoun to almost any non-reflexive verb which can be sort of translated into English as "One does XY", the French on or the German das Man – and it seems to me to be quite a nice feature. That's the impersonal part of reflexivity that I like a lot.

Creating yet another suffix/prefix for reflexivity in verb conjugation is out of the question because I really want to keep things simple. So my question is – do your conlangs have any inter

I know in German they say "Peters Buch" and "das Buch von Peter", but can you also say "das Buch des Peters"? If so, is it used in Hochdeutsch or is it just slang?

Thanks in advance for your help!

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.

Hi all,

I've been trying to put together a personal language for myself and a few DnD friends for about a year now, and I find that I keep scrapping everything over and over again. I settled on the phonology, phonotactics, and grammar a long while ago, but I'm having immense trouble putting that into practice and actually creating words. I know what I want, I just don't know how to assemble it.

I knew I wanted 4 numbers, 3 genders, fusional endings, 9 cases, i-umlaut, a-umlaut, and extensive consonant gradation from the get-go. And I knew I wanted it to sound like a mix between Irish, Icelandic, and Saami, with an orthography inspired by Hungarian. I knew I wanted a robust proto-language so I could continue to derive vocabulary into the future if need be. I just don't know how to choose and construct fusional endings, or how to create consonant gradation without making all the gradation variants behave simply as allomorphs of the same consonant - in other words, how to make a consonant appear both as its own phoneme and as a result of gradation.

Here's some phonology info to give you guys a feel for the type of sound I am aiming for, plus my big chart of vowel mutations.

https://preview.redd.it/rz3quhpyu1a81.png?width=535&format=png&auto=webp&s=3fd6888ab83f20bc29c2e6d3f94b53e19add6b42

Consonants are: /pʰ/ /tʰ/ /kʰ/ /ts/ /tʃ/ /dz/ /dʒ/ /h/ /x/ /f/ /b/ /g/ /d/ /l/ /s/ /z/ /n/ /m/ /w/ /j/ /r/ /ç/ /ɣ/ /θ/ /β/ /ð/ /ṽ/ /ɬ/ /ʃ/ /ʒ/ /ʎ/ /c/ /ŋ/.
The vast majority of these can be labialised, palatised, and/or lengthened (with pre-aspiration for the stops). Syllabic /l/, /r/, /n/, and /m/ is permitted word-finally. All initial clusters you can find in Irish and Norse are allowed. Plus Welsh /sg/ /sb/ /sf/ /sd/.

Genders are masculine, feminine, neuter. Numbers are singular, dual, plural, and collective (which takes singular verb conjugation). Cases are nominative, vocative, accusative, genitive, dative, allative, ablative, locative, and instrumental. The verb paradigm is not fully resolved yet, though I do plan on having fused aspect/tense in at least the past and present. The future will be expressed through present tense + various fusional mood markers (desiderative/conditional/speculative).

Please note, I intend for this language to be COMPLETELY regular under the hood, even if some regular sound changes disguise that at first glance. It's not supposed to be a naturalistic language.

Let's see if we can turn this mass of ideas

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously... (Winning Changes)

By u/Anjeez929 with 2 points:

>I didn't realize you already posted this.
>
>The past auzilliary verbs shorten by one syllable
>
>Theoretical Past: śaha
>
>Mythical past: uha
>
>Very far past: aha
>
>Far past: oha
>
>Near past: śeha

By u/NoCocksInTheRestroom with 2 points:

>add more example sentences

By u/RBolton123 with 1 point:

>ajkan /ajkan/ - (v) to be able to (can)
>
>otu /ɔtu/ - (v) to be obligated to (should)
>
>ajamwili /ajamwili/ - (v) to be willing to (would)
>
>ba /ba/ - (part) question marker
>
>Word Changes:
>
>sikśitasi /sikʂitasi/ becomes sićikasi /siʈʂikasi/ through epenthesis
>
>ekśikituwentitu /ekʂikituwentitu/ becomes ećikituwentitu /eʈʂikituwentitu/ through assimilation
>
>Morphophonology:
>
>/i/ becomes [ʅ] near retroflex consonants
>
>/a/ becomes [ɑ] near /ɫ/

(Bonus Words: owejuf /ɔwɛjuf/ - (n) egg [natural phenomena class]; fainali /fainali/ - (adj) final, finally; aweken /awɛkɛn/ - (v) to awaken, to wake up; awejik /awɛjik/ - (adj) awake, conscious, lucid; traji /tɾaji/ - (v) to try to do; kuros /kuɾɔs/ - (v) to cross, to go across, to traverse; borodero /bɔɾɔdɛɾɔ/ - (n) border, boundary [abstract concepts class])

Phonology

15/12/21

(OP: When one initially steps out of the textbooks, out of memorising principal-parts, and into real Greek, there is always a memory of a first text, passage, or even line which challenged you, causing you to remember that often beautifully constructed piece of Greek (and brownie points to you, of course, for reading it). My first line was: πάντες ἄνθρωποι τοῦ εἰδέναι ὀρέγονται φύσει. Firstly, all mankind (obviously? Im better at this than I thought!). Then τοῦ εἰδέναι ὀρέγονται and I’m straight back to reality. Why is ‘knowing’, an infinitive, in the genitive case; what does ὀρέγονται mean? Well, fastforward nearly eight years and I’m here, understanding, but still awestruck at the beauty of Aristotle’s Metaphysics and here is why: So, ὀρέγω is defined as to reach out or to stretch out one’s hands. ὀρέγομαι is definined as yearn for or long for because that is precisely what you are doing in a metaphorical sense. Much like an infant reaching out for a toy and therefore implying he/ she wants that toy, so too the middle of ὀρέγω takes a step back and asks why are you stretching out your hands? Because you want or yearn for it! Now verbs of ‘taking’ often take the genitive as their compliment, such as λαμβάνω. ὀρέγομαι is muchthe same. So we, being πάντες ἄνθρωποι (all mankind) yearn for τοῦ εἰδέναι (knowledge), and we do this φύσει (by nature, naturally). φύσει, being the dativus auctoris, or dative of agent, is fundamentally placed here and tells us that we just do whatever the sentence prior suggest because of nature. We yearn for knowledge without even knowing that we yearn for knowledge, is what φύσις in the dative tells us here. Aristotle goes on to talk of the principle inhaler of this knowledge as being sight. Okay, just do this: close your eyes. Didn’t you feel that pull, craving for you to open your eyes, that yearning to see once again? Well, you must or you wouldn’t be reading! We have a physical choice whether to see or not, yet we keep our eyes open. Aristotle’s choice of vocabulary here is perfect. So is the syntax. So is the statement. Keep yearning…ὀρέγεσθε… for sight and keep reading word of the day!)

Alot of great jokes get posted here! However just because you have a joke, doesn't mean it's a dad joke.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT NSFW, THIS IS ABOUT LONG JOKES, BLONDE JOKES, SEXUAL JOKES, KNOCK KNOCK JOKES, POLITICAL JOKES, ETC BEING POSTED IN A DAD JOKE SUB

Try telling these sexual jokes that get posted here, to your kid and see how your spouse likes it.. if that goes well, Try telling one of your friends kid about your sex life being like Coca cola, first it was normal, than light and now zero , and see if the parents are OK with you telling their kid the "dad joke"

I'm not even referencing the NSFW, I'm saying Dad jokes are corny, and sometimes painful, not sexual

So check out r/jokes for all types of jokes

r/unclejokes for dirty jokes

r/3amjokes for real weird and alot of OC

r/cleandadjokes If your really sick of seeing not dad jokes in r/dadjokes

Punchline !

Edit: this is not a post about NSFW , This is about jokes, knock knock jokes, blonde jokes, political jokes etc being posted in a dad joke sub

Edit 2: don't touch the thermostat

(Also see the first part of this introduction that deals with the phonology and morphology)

Revelation of the Night Sky (An audio sample from the Maruuteo scriptures)

The single most distinctive feature of Maruutla is that its grammatical relations cannot be described using such terms as ‘subject’, ‘(direct) object’, 'ergative' or 'absolutive', since all those terms would fail to describe the grammar adequately as there is simply no grammatical test or construction that can identify them in the language. Instead, I will use here the terms ‘affected’ and ‘independent’ to refer to those grammatical relations particular to Maruutla (for lack of better terms), whereas the resulting morphosyntactic alignment will be named ‘Affective Alignment’.

So what does this actually mean? We can start the discussion with the affective case, whose function can be described in the most general terms as a grammatical case that marks the argument deemed most affected, or influenced, by the verb in question. Depending on the predicate, that argument may be the equivalent of either the subject, the direct object or the indirect object in a language such as English. Its default form is /-n/, as in χera ‘spoon’ --> χera-n, but it has two other allomorphs which are /-m/ after /o/, as in let’o ‘light’ --> let’o-m, and /-an/ after a consonant or after the vowel /e/ when following an obstruent, as in yotar ‘friend’ --> yotar-an and matl’e ‘duty’ --> matl’e-an. Here are some examples for how it is used:

(1)
χuroʃ     wa-n       t’ea
hit       1SG-AFF    3SG
'He hit me’
(2)
χuroʃ     ta-n       wae
hit       3SG-AFF    1SG
'I hit him’.
(3)
reeya     wa-n       t’ea
see       1SG-AFF    3SG
‘I saw him'
(4)
reeya     ta-n       wae
see       3SG-AFF    1SG
‘He saw me’
(5)
ʃot’al   laheyo-m    rohote’ʃe
write    book-AFF    teacher
‘The teacher wrote the book’
(6)
leeya   rohoteʃe-an   laheyo
read    teacher-AFF   book
‘The teacher read the book’

As can be seen from examples (1), (2) and (5), the affective case (AFF) looks superficially similar to the accusative case in other languages, where it marks the direct object of prototypically transitive verbs such as χuroʃ ‘hit’ or Ɬo’re ‘break’, as well as the direct object of ca

The doctor says it terminal.

Do your worst!

How the hell am I suppose to know when it’s raining in Sweden?

Mathematical puns makes me number

We told her she can lean on us for support. Although, we are going to have to change her driver's license, her height is going down by a foot. I don't want to go too far out on a limb here but it better not be a hack job.

Ants don’t even have the concept fathers, let alone a good dad joke. Keep r/ants out of my r/dadjokes.

But no, seriously. I understand rule 7 is great to have intelligent discussion, but sometimes it feels like 1 in 10 posts here is someone getting upset about the jokes on this sub. Let the mods deal with it, they regulate the sub.

They were cooked in Greece.

I'm surprised it hasn't decade.

He lost May

Now that I listen to albums, I hardly ever leave the house.

Don't you know a good pun is its own reword?

Two muffins are in an oven, one muffin looks at the other and says "is it just me, or is it hot in here?"

Then the other muffin says "AHH, TALKING MUFFIN!!!"

For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.

I said "hey look, an escaPEA"

No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!

Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂

It really does, I swear!

I. Introduction

After some six years, I've finally gotten this language into a state that I like. It used to be a typical baby's first Romlang, but through some deft combination of my hatred of paradigm tables and actually learning how languages work, it's become something that I hope is both realistic and… somewhat odd.

The Velmarin Popular Latin Standard (Velmarina Nimmina Latina Veusyungoa; 静海人民朱文標準語) is an a posteriori language that is predominately Latinate (though not Romance) in its phonology and vocabulary, but with many Sinoxenic loanwords and a strong Sinitic (and East and Southeast Asian in general) influence on its verbs, adjectives, and syntax.

In universe, it's spoken as a first language by about 60~65% of the population (about three million people) of the Velmarin Empire (Sua Maesta Re Publica Aousta Velmarina; 静海張皇公務之威嚴), an archipelagic city-state about two days' sail south of Hong Kong. Latin speakers, predominately from liminal areas along the Danube and Rhine, first arrived in the archipelago via the Indian Ocean during a short window between the early Severan dynasty and the early Third Century Crisis (ca. 190–240 ᴄᴇ), and have been isolated from linguistic developments in broader Romance ever since.

II. Phonology

The Popular Latin Standard is phonologically conservative, retaining velars before front vowels and /w/ and /j/ as approximants (often [β˕] and [ʝ˕]), except around sonorants.

Consonants

Voiceless stops are lightly aspirated.

/tj dj sj/ palatalise to [tɕ dʑ ɕ] (younger speakers are in the process of depalatalising these to [ts dz s]). Geminated /ɾ/ is produced as a trill [r].

Some speakers have difficulty differentiating /ɾ/ and /l/; others can differentiate them, but do so by producing /l/ as [n] and /ɾ/ as [ɾ ~ ɺ ~ ɭ ~ l]. This latter group of speakers generally produce stop-liquid clusters (/tɾ/, /bl/, etc) as voiceless aspirated stops (/tʰ/, /pʰ/, etc).

Vowels

The extent to which long vowels and geminate consonants are phonemic is debated, but both do affect the pitch accent. At the very least, /eː ~ ei/ and /oː ~ ou/ are phonemic, and most speakers distinguish /a/ from /aː ~ ɑː/ in key syll

This is a little lesson to explain some functions of Appalachian English. If you want to see more or have questions, ask in the comments below. This uses an orthography I developed for Appalachian English, so spelling is different (I'll explain this in a future post.)

Joasif: A hav màsilf¹ a piug heer, an A'm a-sailin² hit³ fur twinny dollers.

Gavin: Hou cum onli twinny? Sumthin quair bout it?

Joasif: No, jiss ain't no⁴ yiuss in raisin⁵ hit, giun A got fàv haff-groed⁹.

Gavin: Well, A hain't⁶ got twinny dollers, but A'l pai foùtein dollers fur hit.

Joasif: A reckon A màht cuid⁷ sail hit fur fortein.

Gavin: A'l bà hit theun. Foùtein⁸ dollers.

Language Points:

¹ Personal Dative — A common construction in Appalachian English, often used for stress or importance.

² A-prefixing — Occurs in the progressive aspect, stress must be on the first syllable of the verb. This goes back to Cockney English.

³Hit — A sort of stressed pronoun, a form of 'it.' There is a relaxed form of 'you,' 'yi,' this is unrelated to "Elizabethan English."

⁴Double Negative — Acceptable usage in Appalachian English, used for intensity.

⁵Lack of A-prefixing — Occurs here because the verb is not in the progressive aspect.

⁶Hain't — An intensive form of 'ain't.' Can also be used in its non-auxiliary sense, while 'ain't' can not.

⁷Compound Auxiliary — Found in Appalachian English and General Southerner English, here màht cuid means "might be able to."

⁸Variation Between Speakers — Some speakers pronounce four, north, and Lord as foù, nawth, and Lawd, this varies between speakers and social contexts.

⁹Irregular Verb — All irregular verbs ending in -oe that change to -eu in their past tense will instead either regularize to -oed or change to -eud.

Vocabulary:

sail — to sell
twinny — twenty
quair —  strange, odd
jiss — just
yiuss — use (n.)
giun — since, if
ain't — haven't, hasn't, isn't, aren't, am not
reckon — to suppose

And now I’m cannelloni

I mean... the main characteristics that define this kind of construction.

I guess I'm writing these now. Also, I made the chart more compact

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously, on Lucifer... (Winning Changes)

By u/Anjeez929 with 5 points:

>"Haka", a word based on the prefix "hak(a)-", means "Fish and Chips"
>
>My reasoning:
>
>French->French Fries+Fish=Fish and Chips

By u/RBolton123 with 1 point:

>Existing /ɕ/ becomes /ʂ/, still represented with <ś>. Similarly, existing /tɕ/ becomes /ʈʂ/, represented with <ć>.
>
>From there, /x/ becomes /ɕ/, yet again keeping its orthography of <x>, and /dʑ/ devoices into /tɕ/ and is represented with <ģ>.
>
>/n/ word-finally disappears, but it becomes /j/ in liaison if the word is followed with a vowel-initial.
>
>/ŋ/ nasalizes the vowel preceding it. In the case of ńi, it nasalizes the vowel after it i.e. the /i/.
>
>/ɲ/ becomes /nij/.
>
>Lastly, all cases of /ə/ become /a/, represented with <a>, and rhotic vowel harmony is dismantled. I'm sorry to see it go.

I'm just going to make all the vowels in a word that used to have rhotic vowel harmony into /a/ but vowels in prefixes won't turn into /a/ when added to them.

Hey everyone on r/conlangscirclejerk! Did you miss us? Well, in fact! We never left you!

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously... (Winning Changes)

By u/NoCocksInTheRestroom with 2 points:

>add almost 30 ways to say cum in toki pona as official vocabulary

New words: "telo" meaning "fluid", "ko" meaning squishy, "walo" meaning "white", "umpa" meaning "sex", "olin" meaning "love", "kule" meaning "color" is "colorful", "pilin" meaning "feeling", "pona" meaning "good", "pali" meaning "to make", "sike" meaning "round", and "palisa" meaning "stick" or "long and hard". Also, "telowalo" meaning "milk"

By u/Anjeez929 with 1 point:

>The first few lines of the Bee movie script as an example!
>
>New words.
>
>-(n)et marks the passive participle
>
>Tana /tana/ - (prep) according to
>
>Sona /sona/ - (v) to know
>
>lawa /lawa/ - (n) laws
>
>tawaso /tawaso/ - (v) to fly ("Flight" and therefore "aviation" is made by nominalizing it)
>
>Majkel /majkel/ - (n) Bee
>
>Redbul /ɾedbul/ - (n) wings
>
>Tu /tu/ - (adv) too (as in too small)
>
>lili /lili/ - (adj) small
>
>haja /ħaja/ - (v) lift
>
>fat /fat/ - (adj) fat (n) fat
>
>korpa /koɾpa/ - (n) bo

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously, on Lucifer... (Winning Changes)

By u/Anjeez929 with 2 points:

>The word Yaya /jaja/ means Baby.
>
>If The word Cloń can have an irregular spelling, Why not Yaya?

By u/NoCocksInTheRestroom with 2 points:

>New tenses for parallel timelines! (parallel shortened to "par")
>
>par Present—pha(p)-
>
>par scary Present of our reality —thu(t)-
>
>par General Past—khi(t)-
>
>par General future—che(t)-
>
>a time existing outside of the comprehensom of arbitrary scales— a(p)-

By u/RBolton123 with 1 point:

>Word-final plosives are lost, and the vowel preceding it gets a low tone.
>
>Word-final fricatives are lost, and the vowel preceding it gets a high tone.
>
>/ɟ/ becomes /dʑ/.
>
>/ɾʲ/ becomes /ɾij/.
>
>/j/ after another /j/ separated by a vowel becomes /n/. (e.g. /jaja/ -> /jana/) This change happens after the first one, so rjejin /ɾʲɛjin/ becomes rijenin /ɾijɛnin/
>
>/ɫ/ is now represented with <ƚ> because Polish.

^(1) - Represented by <c> only in the word cloń /kloŋ/

^(2) - Represent

I hated editing this. u/Anjeez929 is braver than any Marine

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously, on Lucifer... (Winning Changes)

By u/spaceman06 with 2 points:

>Each letter has a phoneme that is only used to see the letter itself (or combination of phonemes used by the letter itself).
>
>This avoids something that happens at languages, like C and SEE being spoken at the same way.
>
>You also wont have a consonant 1, where CONSONANT1 and CONSONANT1 followed by VOWEL1 means the same thing. Like B and BE at english.

By u/RBolton123 with 1 point:

>Can't think of anything major so I'll just change some things to make the language easier to pronounce.
>
>Parallel Tenses
>
>Parallel Present—paha(p)-
>
>Parallel Scary Present of our reality —tuhu(t)-
>
>Parallel General Past—kihi(t)-
>
>Parallel General future—cehe(t)-
>
>a time existing outside of the comprehension of arbitrary scales— aha(p)-
>
>/ɾij/ vanishes completely. If two of the same vowel are next to each other, they become one long vowel
>
>/ɧ/ becomes /ɕuf/ with /f/ <f> becoming a new phoneme. Also a new word using /f/, friholes /fɾiħɔlɛs/ - (n) bean (natural concepts class)

First of all, sorry u/NoCocksInTheRestroom; I've been holding off doing this post simply because I was afraid of your suggestion. Emojis in the orthography scare me. But I promised that no holds are barred, and so it goes in. I'll also be adding u/MonkiWasTooked's suggestion because it's cool.

Notice: As nobody wants to upvote this post anymore, I will be moving to r/Klojban. The existing Klojban posts will be crossposted there, and new ones will be posted there only. Hope to see you around.

Klojban, an Evolving Conlang: Introduction

With the downfall of r/EvolvingConlang and the rise of like ten others in its place, I firmly believe that a spiritual successor to it must be made. u/EkskiuTwentyTwo, if you want me to delete this, I shall.

Anyways, here is Klojban, named in the same manner as Lojban was to Loglan. Somewhat. It will have more rules than the other "add features by commenting them" conlangs:

• The top three comments will be added instead of just the topmost one
• The phonology must consist of actual phonemes; the grammar and lexicon, though, can be as wild as you want them to be
• The orthography can be changed but it must be done in a separate comment.
• If you want me to append a link to your suggestion, you can do so, but make sure it isn't NSFW or anything
• Words added at the same time as a sound change do not have the sound change applied to them, as they are loanwords.

Previously, on Lucifer... (Winning Changes)

By u/NoCocksInTheRestroom with 4 points:

> Mood indicated woth tones! (and also prefixes since prefixes are cool) also tones appear yeah
>
>(no prefix) —neutral, no mood
>
>😃—happy ˥
>
>😔—sad ˩
>
>😭—ZAD!˥˩
>
>😱—ZAMN!˩˥
>
>💩—Fell like shit˦˧˨
>
>👣—i am litteraly a foot fetishist˥˩˥
>
>⚰️—im gonna die˨˦˩
>
>☠️—im dead˥˦˧
>
>💀 —i forgor˩˥˨
>
>😁—i rember˥˩˦

By u/RBolton123 with 2 points:

>Missing Words:
>
>gibap /giβap/ - (v) to give
>
>tekawe /tekawe/ - (v) to take
>
>tudu /tudu/ - (v) to do
>
>tugo /tugo/ - (v) to go
>
>woka /woka/ - (v) to walk
>
>ranawe /ɾanawe/ - (v) to run
>
>isuwimi /isuwimi/ - (v) to swim
>
>bajiń /βajiŋ/ - (v) to buy
>
>seliń /seliŋ/ - (v) to sell
>
>buwil /βuwil/ - (v) to build
>
>desturoja /destʉɾɤja/ - (v) to destroy
>
>iskaja /iskaja/ - (n) sky [natu