Language Creation - Vocables needed

[Tonguez]

AgokhenKasaag - Return home (to the Lair)
* (A-GOkh-ken-KAH sahg) as to pronounciation I would have the kh highly aspirated (almost like gargling!)


Na'Jata derived from your We'jata. Its permutations for hello and you/your are based on the view of Dragonfolk as egotistacal and selfcentered

Na'jata -(naah-Shah-Ta) - Me, Mine
eg Na'jata Kasaag

Pa-Na'Jata - Hello (Lit Do you belong to me?)

Teia-Na'jata (Teya-naah-Shah-Ta)- You, Your (Lit Not mine)
eg Kasaag teia-Na'jata

Kwoma (KWOH-mar) - Thing, Food
Kwoma agokhenar - Animal, Creature (lit running food)

 

[Verequus]

Interesting variations. But don't they imply a certain meaning to "jata"?

 

[Mercule]

Interesting variations. But don't they imply a certain meaning to "jata"?

I think that's the point. The implication is that the dragons are a deeply self-interested race. "Na'jata" means "me" or "mine" -- more likely, it'd mean "my thing", which also reflects the fact that they have a hard time seeing even other sentient races as more than "things". "We'jata" would pretty much translate to "my kind".

 

[reanjr]

Aye to the SE Asian languages. Heck, Malay is to me as Celtic is to Tolkien. Full of great words like 'ular' for snake (which I named my Ulari after). Great language, though it has a lot of blending lately since it's basically a tiny version of America in regards to cultural integration.

I think you mean as FINNISH is to Tolkien.

 

[The Sigil]

Here are some more, off the top of my head...

• Urr (the "u" is pronounced as the "oo" in english "hoot" or "troop", the double rr indicates a slightly "trilled" r sound) == father, though often applied to "leader" rather than biological father
• Bahal (pron. "bay hall") == Evil
• Bahal'Urr == Leader of evil (corrupted into the common tongue as "Balor")
• Sihil (pron. "see hill") == Good
• Sihil'Urr == Leader of good (corrupted to "Solar" in the common tongue)
• Khar (aspirated "kh" sounds like the "ch" in "chutzpah", the rest rhymes with "car") == Tree
• Khar'agokhenar == Treant (i.e., tree which moves)
• agokhen (repeated from above, means movement, though I would like to clarify it as "that which moves of its own volition)
• khish (sounds like english "quiche" except with the aspirated kh as before) == small
• makh (sounds like english "mach" as in the speed of sound except with an aspirated kh) == large
• khokh (long "o" sound like in "coke" but with aspirated hard sounds) == many
• ashikh (long "a" as in "awful" and high "i" as in "quiche") == that which moves but not of its own volition
• Iss (high "i" as in "quiche", long "s" as in "hiss") == water
• Iss'khokh'khish'ashikh == rain (literally: water many small moving - but not of its own volition) -- this could possibly be corrupted to "Issokhish'ashikh" as duplicated back-to-back consonant sounds are "lost" (e.g., "khokh'khish") and closely similar consonant sounds are swallowed into the word over the course of time (e.g., "Iss'khokh")... "issokhish" might be the word for "dew" with most dragons having forgotten that it was originally three separate words until they engage in a little thought to dissect it.
• Iss'makh'ashikh == river (literally: water large moving - but again, not of its own accord)
• Iss'makh'agokhen == water elemental (literally: water large moving of its own accord)

In general, I would suggest that since monosyllabic words are usually developed first, it would make sense for monosyllabic words to reflect things or concepts that have been around a long time... things like "leader/father" will be around from the time there are multiple dragons in the same place - and without more than one dragon around, no need to create a language, right? Rocks, trees, water, air, sky... all of these things have been around since life could subsist on the planet, so they're also monosyllabic candidates. Simple concepts like "good" and "evil" are also candidates.

You seem to have chosen the agglutenative(sp?) model for construction of larger words, however, so words like "rain" are not necessarily words in and of themselves, but rather an "accumulation" of more elementary words that describe the nature of the thing.

That, I think, would be another draconic trait; their language should reflect an interest not in merely naming the thing, but in offering up a representation of the intrinsic nature of that "thing." For instance, a dragon's differentiation between "horse" and "human" might be as simple as "four-legged creature" vs "two-legged creature which speaks." To a dragon, that might consist of the only fundamental difference between a horse and a human - the number of legs and the ability to speak. In fact, dragons might have a hard time distinguishing between an elf/dwarf/orc and a human if they rarely contact them in your world, because they wouldn't have seen enough two-legged talking beasts to start demarcating them into racial groups as outlined above (eventually you might see elves distinguished as "long-lived" vs. "hairy" dwarves vs "tall" humans or something).

--The Sigil

 

[blargney the second]

Kaa (kah): earth
Ner (nair): air
Agokh: to run
Iss'agokh: to swim (water-run)
Kaa'agokh: to burrow (earth-run)
Ner'agokh: to fly (air-run)

-blarg

 

[blargney the second]

Rul (rool): fire
Ve (vay): not
Eas (AY-as): to do
Vegokh: dead (abbreviation of Ve'agokh: not running)
Vegokheas: to kill (to do dead)
Nereas: to breathe (to do air)
Vegokh'nereas: killing breath (generic)
Rul'vegokh'nereas: flame breath

-blarg

 

[Tonguez]

These are great guys keep them coming!
I especially like Iss'khokh'khish'ashikh but how do you pronounce that thing!!!

Interesting variations. But don't they imply a certain meaning to "jata"?

Mercule explained the basic principle I was looking at and the explanation of Na'jata = 'my thing' makes sense. I'd suggest ~Jata is a bound morpheme with the meaning of 'personal possession' usually appearing as a suffix

Na~ 1st person Possessive particle ' => Na'Jata (Lit My possession)

We~ 1st person collective possesive particle -> We'Jata (Lit Our collective possession)

 

[Verequus]

WOW! Those entries are impressing me beyound spechlessness!

But a little nitpicking: There aren't words for mother, life and death yet.

In general, I would suggest that since monosyllabic words are usually developed first, it would make sense for monosyllabic words to reflect things or concepts that have been around a long time... things like "leader/father" will be around from the time there are multiple dragons in the same place - and without more than one dragon around, no need to create a language, right? Rocks, trees, water, air, sky... all of these things have been around since life could subsist on the planet, so they're also monosyllabic candidates. Simple concepts like "good" and "evil" are also candidates.

Convincing argumentation.

You seem to have chosen the agglutenative(sp?) model for construction of larger words, however, so words like "rain" are not necessarily words in and of themselves, but rather an "accumulation" of more elementary words that describe the nature of the thing.

You mean this? This could be, I'll have to talk with my helper about that subject.

That, I think, would be another draconic trait; their language should reflect an interest not in merely naming the thing, but in offering up a representation of the intrinsic nature of that "thing." For instance, a dragon's differentiation between "horse" and "human" might be as simple as "four-legged creature" vs "two-legged creature which speaks." To a dragon, that might consist of the only fundamental difference between a horse and a human - the number of legs and the ability to speak. In fact, dragons might have a hard time distinguishing between an elf/dwarf/orc and a human if they rarely contact them in your world, because they wouldn't have seen enough two-legged talking beasts to start demarcating them into racial groups as outlined above (eventually you might see elves distinguished as "long-lived" vs. "hairy" dwarves vs "tall" humans or something).

--The Sigil

My dragons aren't the same like in the core rules, so I have to tweak some words anyway. But still you are pointing out something, I have to consider. IMC, dragons believe to be superior, because they are created by the nature goddess herself, the most powerful entity after the Powers of Good and Evil (or maybe not - I didn't think so much about the pantheon yet, because other areas of campaign design matter more now). In truth, they have been created a druid, who's gone crazy. While he did a remarkable good job compared to other lifeform inverntors, the We'Jatas have a fundamental flaw, although they don't recognize it as such.

Mercule explained the basic principle I was looking at and the explanation of Na'jata = 'my thing' makes sense. I'd suggest ~Jata is a bound morpheme with the meaning of 'personal possession' usually appearing as a suffix.

After looking up the meaning of "Bound Morpheme", I think it is appropriate.

 

[The Sigil]

WOW! Those entries are impressing me beyound spechlessness!

But a little nitpicking: There aren't words for mother, life and death yet.

A little more nitpicking - usually, dragons are nigh-unto immortal creatures; would they really need words for life and death, considering they themselves don't experience it? Just a thought.

Also, it might not be a bad idea to look at gender roles in draconic - some languages are genderless (e.g., Hungarian has only one "third person" article -as opposed to three in English, "he, she, it") and in that case "mother" would be the same as "father."

If you really want them though, here are some suggestions:

Él (pronounced like English "Ale") == Life
Uskh (the "u' is pronounced like the "oo" in "loop", and as usual the kh is aspirated) == Death
Abba (pronounced with long "ah" sounding a's) == Mother (the word for mother in most languages is with an "ah" sound since that is the easiest sound for a baby to make plus one simple consonant - usually an "m" or a "b" since these are simply the sounds made when the mouth closes and opens, breaking up a simple "ahhhhh"). If your dragons are more serpentine, and you think hissing sounds could come naturally, "Assa" might also be appropriate.

--The Sigil