User talk:Sectori

From IBWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Another Thought

Another idea came to me. Is there, perhaps, room for a Germanic conlang in either the HRE or the SR? Some state unaccounted for in either one? Sectori 18:12, 26 November 2006 (PST)

Elbic Precursor

I assume this is Italocarune...You asked where to make the language page. I think before we create your language page, you may want to decide if Elbese is descended of Romance_Languages Central and Southern Italian or Northern Italian, as referenced on this page's chart. What do you think? And may I say, welcome! BoArthur

Hmmm...I'm not sure it's either. I'm sound changing Old Elbese directly from Latin.Sectori 14:40, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
Hm.... How would they not have gone through similar changes as the rest of the region? What kept them isolated so that it could happen? Data for your history section, I'm sure. :) BoArthur 14:47, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
Quite so. Elba's sort of out of the way. Middle Elbese to Modern is not a problem, that's from 1649 to approximately 1870, between the regency of Giovanna d'Este and the fall of the Napoleon III. Elba wasn't conquered by Napoleon, so Elbese had a chance to develop on its own while it's Princes and (presumably) Princesses were doing "minor" things. It's the time between the ascendency of the Appiani family in 1098 and around 1497 (the discovery of Alba Nuadh) that gives me difficulties, from Old Elbese to Middle Elbese. Between 1497 and 1649 is not a problem because the Elbans were too busy not contributing to the effort to colonize the Americas. What happened between 1098 and 1497 that could divert attention from Elba?Sectori 15:21, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
Might I just give away some free advice for gratis and nothing? Don't just soundchange it directly from Latin. Several reasons, really- firstly because there already three "isolates" on IB's Romance family tree- which have the benefit of being remarkably isolated from the rest of the Romance mainstream (but still a little too unrealistic for my tastes, TBH). Another one right next to the Tuscan heartlands wouldn't really be believable. Another Central Romance language closely related to Italian and Tuscan, on the other hand, would, particularly if Elba's retained a degree of political independence. Ytterbion's Law IMO should apply to conlangs as well- let's stay within the realms of the credible. If you're insistant on deriving it directly from Latin and creating yet another subbranch on the Romance family tree, I would recommend you situate it somewhere markedly more remote, such as the Pelagian Islands or maybe Pantelleria. Please don't think I'm being overly harsh, but let's keep these things relatively believable and in line with the Five Pillars. Deiniol 15:22, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
Hmm....The Knights Templar? Altercations with Malta? The Holy See? Maybe you could (in light of Deiniol's Comment) have simply a strong influence from Rome that maintained some of the Latin trappings that might've been lost and still have it descended from Tuscan's branch? BoArthur 15:26, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
That is of course a consideration. Let me see if my sound changes apply to Italian. There are a few I'll need to update, but it could work out. I'll get back to you. I think I'm going to retain a Nominative-Vocative case, an Accusative case, and a Dative-Genitive case in Old Elbese, then merge Nom-Voc-Acc in Middle, and see how many remain in Modern. I'll probably also keep what are in other Romance languages compound tenses as single inflections until at least Middle Elbese, and an inflected passive voice in Old. That seems to me like a plan. I'll update my sound changes and start applying them to some Italian right away. Sectori 15:32, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
That won't work. Language development doesn't work like that- there's more to it than having Italianalike sound changes! If you retain an inflected passive and case distinctions (particularly that curious division) you've got a completely seperate branch, and one which will be an utter bugger to justify. Logically and realistically speaking, Old Elbese would be most likely *extremely* similar to "Old Tuscan".
The Italo-Dalmatian branch of Romance, of which Elbese would be a part, lost all case distinctions pretty early- most likely before the end of the Western Empire- due to sound-change (i.e. collapse of short front vowels in final position and loss of final -s and -m, both of which are common Romance developments shared). If you're desperate for a case system, the best you're likely to get is an Old French two-case system, and that's rather pushing it. In your shoes I'd rule out an inflected passive immediately unless you have a really good justifation for it (e.g. Padraic keeps a vestige of it in Kerno due to a heavy Celtic substrate)- it was universally lost in the Vulgar Latin of Italy by the first century CE at the latest. You don't need to retain unlikely complications from Classical Latin to make the language interesting- far from it. If you can't justify it, it just comes off as being somewhat less imaginitive. Why not look at some interesting features retained by other languages of the family? I know I've pimped this like buggery in #isharia, but what about retaining the neuter gender like Neapolitan? Why not take the Gorgia Toscana and go wild with it? Deiniol 16:13, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
In IB you've got to be especially careful with the language you create. It has to be reasonable within the framework of IB. Sure, we've got plenty of romlangs, but they're all within the realm of plausibility. You pretty much have to work within what we know of modern romlangs here, so you can't really get too exotic with them, especially if Elbese isn't some far flung language stuck in the middle of the sea with no influence from other languages.
For Montreiano, I've followed much of what Spanish and Portuguese do *here*, that is the grammar isn't exotic for an Iberian Romance language. Many of the sound changes are what Spanish speakers *here* do also. There are a good number of phonetic archaisms (explained by Montreiano speakers heading to their current area in the 17th century, at a time where both Montreiano and Castilian were a lot more similar). Some of the exoticness comes from sound changes of its own, and even then I think I've stretched Montreiano's plausibility as far as it can possibly go. I'd be very careful how you construct Elbese, and I hate to stifle any creativeness, but to get it to fit into IB, it does need to be plausible within the framework of this universe. Doobieous 23:21, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
You sound quite versed in what you've suggested, Sectori, but some food-for-thought; how much of the cases would stick around with a Papal influence, what was lost by the time Tuscan Italian came about, etc etc. You know what to do, I'm sure, but I thought I'd bring it up in case you hadn't. BoArthur 15:35, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
I like the neuter gender. I have it in Carune. Let me consider this overnight (I'm about to go to sleep) and get back to you in the morning. I like the neuter gender. Hmm...I'm looking at the Neapolitan wikibook right now (surprisingly good, actually). Standard plural is nice. But changing the vowel...maybe in Old Elbese, but if Middle starts to mix with French or Spanish (the Elban royalty married Aragonese, after all), I may add -s in addition to or in place of the vowel change. We'll see. I'll finish this thought tomorrow. Sectori 20:09, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
All right, time to finish this thought. Old Elbic (note the name change) will run fairly parallel to Neapolitan until the late 1400s (so "Central and Southern Romance"), when it Elba gets left behind in the rush for the "New World". Middle Elbic starts to really diverge due to the influence of a series of royal marriages to Spanish and French nobility starting in the mid-1600s. Modern Elbic really started to emerge from mixed-ness into its own language in the late 1800s, especially after the French proclaim the Restored Republic. Grammatically, this means the neuter gender is retained. Cases are probably lost by the 1300s, so they're only present in very old texts in Elbic (the ones no-one reads). The inflected passive becomes a passive participle (not to be confused with the perfect participles). Single-inflection compound tenses are also dropped by the decline of Old Elbic (though they remain in a distinction between perfect and pluperfect participles in Middle Elbic, though this distinction is largely lost in Modern Elbic). Does all that make sense? Sectori 13:08, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
Retaining cases and an inflected passive at any period beyond AD 400 makes no sense at all if it's running parallel to Neapolitan until 1400. The inflected passives particularly (or any trace of them)- they simply don't survive in Central and Southern Romance. You can't claim that it's part of the Central and Southern subbranch if you're diverging from established facts that wildly. Seriously, if you want some help with Vulgar Latin and Proto-Romance and how they differed from Classical Latin (i.e. how muh you can get away with and still remain plausible), either PM me on the ZBB, ask on #isharia or email me at [email protected]
If it sounds like I'm being curmudgeonly or grouchy, I apologise- I am rather looking forward to seeing what you come up with for this. Particularly with influences from other languages- they're always fun! Deiniol 16:54, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
In that case, we can just set the clock back. How's the 300s? Sectori 17:46, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
Dandy, but that wouldn't be Old Elbic, it'd be Vulgar Latin! :P Deiniol 06:20, 20 May 2006 (PDT)
Yes, that makes sense to me. It also seems plausible within IB as well. Good job. Doobieous 13:29, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
Thanks. Time to actually get cracking on...er...transitional Elbic, between "Old" and Middle. (Remember, Old is going to pretty much just like Neapolitan). Sectori 13:39, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
Hmmm, and going back to the first question, now that Elbic is going to be a Central and Southern Italian language, does it get to go on the Romance Language chart? Sectori 14:43, 19 May 2006 (PDT)

Update

The phonology is now up at Frath. You can find the link at the Elbic page. — Sectori 16:34, 21 May 2006 (PDT)

Now I have the nouns and first conjugation verbs up. I'm still working on the the other two, but I'll probably put up the irregulars ésshe and ávhe soon. — Sectori 04:49, 24 May 2006 (PDT)
I added a description of the soft mutation and I'll probably get adjectives done some time this week. Sectori 20:18, 31 July 2006 (PDT)

Misspelling

Sorry 'bout that...wee bit tired here, what with the baby sick last night. BoArthur 12:31, 22 May 2006 (PDT)

Where? Sectori 17:35, 23 May 2006 (PDT)
In Lla Dafern; you changed it from Sentori to Sectori. Like I said, I was tired and sick. :(
Ah. It was so minor, I forgot about it. No worries! Sectori 14:41, 24 May 2006 (PDT)

Italy

Before I can continue on the map I abortively started for you today, are you going to keep all the administrative subdivisions that were set up by DeCameron? BoArthur 12:07, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

I'm not sure...I think that it's probably best to drop Nice, Savoy, and Istria, given that there have been some disputes about their location and over who owns them. I think that it might be wise to come closer to "real world" Italy and remove some of the multitude of states, making the following changes:
  • Alba is incorporated into Piedmont.
  • Northwest Piedmont becomes Aosta (otherwise Piedmont would be huge).
  • Aquilea is incorporated into Friuli.
  • Carpi is incorporated into Modena.
  • Ceva stays, occupying the Cuneo province of Piedmont *here*
  • Correggio is incorporated into Modena.
  • I can't find Finale or Santa Flora on Wikipedia, so I think we should just write them out.
  • Gonzaga is incorporated into Mantua.
  • Guastalla is incorporated into Modena.
  • Lucca is added to Massa (province in Northern Tuscany *here*).
  • Massa (province in Northern Tuscany *here*) incorporates Lucca to form the province of Massa.
  • The Metropolitan Duchies incorporate the metropolitan areas of their various cities.
  • Montferrat is the provinces of Asti and Alessandria in Piedmont *here*.
  • Modena incorporates Carpi, Corregio, and Guastalla.
  • Novellara is incorporated into Modena
  • Ormea is incorporated into Ceva.
  • Parma is made up of *here*'s Parma and Piacenza in Emilia-Romagna.
  • Romagna is made up *here*'s Bologna, Ferrara, Ravenna, Forli-Cesena, and Rimini.
  • Saluzzo is incorporated into Ceva.
  • Spoleto is the province of Umbria *here*, so it might as well be called such.
  • Tavolara is off of Sardinia, and as such I believe should belong to the Kingdom of Two Sicilies.
  • Tenda seems to have been ceded to France at some point *here* after WWII, so I think it's probably best to just forget about it and assume it has been part of France for some time.
  • Torriglia is incorporated into Liguria
  • Trento occupies *here*'s Trentino-Alto Adige.
  • Tuscany is the same as *here*, minus Elba and Piombino.
  • Tyrrhenia is a much older concept that seems not to exist anymore *here* so just ignore it.
  • Umbria is the same as Spoleto.
  • Urbino is incorporated into the Marches.
  • Venda seems to be in South Africa, so best to ignore it.
  • Venetia is the same as Veneto *here*.
  • Vetulonia is incorporated into Tuscany.


Hmmm...let's narrow that list down to an accurate list of member states and their "real world" equivalents.
  • Aosta: as *here*
  • Ceva: as the province of Cuneo in Piedmont *here*
  • Montferrat: as the provinces of Asti and Alessandria in Piedmont *here*
  • Piedmont: as *here*, minus the provinces of Cuneo, Asti, and Alessandria.
  • Modena: as the provinces of Modena and Reggio Emilia *here* in Emilio-Romagna
  • Friuli: as *here*
  • Mantua: as *here*'s Mantova in Lombardy, probably should be called Mantova
  • Massa: as *here*'s Lucca and Massa provinces in Tuscany
  • The Metropolitan Duchies: as the metropolitan areas of *here*'s Ancona, Bologna, Genova, Milano, Padova, and Torino.
  • Parma: as the provinces of Parma and Piacenza in Emilia-Romagna *here*.
  • Elba: as Elba *here*
  • Piombino: as Piombino *here* (it's probably too small to be on the map)
  • Romagna: as the provinces of Bologna, Ferrara, Ravenna, Forli-Cesena, and Rimini in Emilia-Romagna *here*.
  • Umbria: as Umbria *here*.
  • Liguria: as Liguria *here*
  • Trento: as Trentino-Alto Adige *here*
  • The Marches: as the Marches *here*
  • Veneto: as Veneto *here*
  • Tuscany: as *here*, but minus Elba, Piombino, Lucca, and Massa.
  • Lombardy: as *here*, but minus Mantova.
I see that a great many of these provinces were named after tiny towns, many of them in Cuneo in Piedmont. I don't know why they existed at all. Sorry for the long message. Sectori 14:20, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

Maybe those that we've merged in can remain as sub-polities and be connected or merged into the parent articles? What do you think? BoArthur 13:50, 7 April 2007 (PDT)

That's what I was going to do, yes. I've redone the template (Template:Italy), but I kept the old one (Template:Italia) so that I can find the old provinces. Then, I can take the old information on, say, Alba, and add it to the article on Ceva. For the provinces which never had any information, I'll find what I can from Wikipedia, if possible or necessary. Sound like a plan? Sectori 13:54, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
It sounds like a good hybrid to me. BoArthur 13:57, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
Any word on the map? Sectori 18:44, 22 April 2007 (PDT)

My Articles

What do you think of the Cheese and Sausage of Louisianne and Ségolène Royal articles?

Find pictures for the cheeses. There's bound to be a look-alike somewhere on the web. Mme. Royal looks like an interesting person. I'd be interested to see what fills in the "controversy over personal issues" section. Remind me to write something about the Queen of Italy sometime. Sectori 14:12, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
I don't have my interdimensional space-folder working...they're cheeses I've completely made up. :( BoArthur 15:53, 7 April 2007 (PDT)

Italian Nobility

I was wondering if maybe there's a branch of Italian nobility who might be a good source for the bride to Nicolae Vladescu Vlas-Florea? Zahir 23:14, 15 September 2007 (PDT)

It is entirely possible. All of Italy's member states except Lombardy, the Metropolitan Duchies, Liguria, and Trento. So pick one, preferably one that has information, and I'll see what I can come up with. Sectori 06:31, 16 September 2007 (PDT)
How about Mantua? I see that the city has had Duchesses for quite awhile. But is there any reason to believe Duchess Bianca is an only child? This also has the fun possibility of controversy over whether Nicolae is supposed to add "Guelph" to his family name. Zahir 07:22, 16 September 2007 (PDT)
That would be fun. Bianca II's younger sister, Antonia Guelph, has announced her intention to marry Vladescu, as the two have been seeing each other secretly for the past two years. The Queen and the Senate insist that, if she truly intends to carry out this plan, Vladescu must take on the Guelph name and come to Mantua to live in the palace. Antonia and Vladescu plan to move to Oltenia. Controversy ensues. Sectori 07:39, 16 September 2007 (PDT)
Heh heh heh. I likes it. Zahir 09:03, 16 September 2007 (PDT)

Okay, I've pretty much got the article on Nicolae where I want it. His basic position, family, personality is all there. Hardworking and hardplaying, a team player who ends up being captain, and with a formidable brain. How do you want to handle this? Do you want to write an article about Antonia? Or simply do a news story? Will you write it, or shall I? Or should we collaborate? Zahir 12:06, 17 September 2007 (PDT)

I'll definitely write an article about Antonia (and appoint her as Italy's Foreign Affairs minister, allowing for more contact between her and Vladescu). I think, however, that an announcement of their marriage could be a good news story. I'm not sure if I'll have time to write it, though.
On second thought, maybe we should wait until their articles get looked over, first. Finally, a quick thought on logistics--if Antonia were to marry Vladescu and move to Oltenia, she would have to give up her post as Foreign Minister, which she isn't thrilled about, and which Liliana Spada (the Chancellor) is extremely not thrilled about, as she has come to rely on Antonia's advice, and there was talk of her running as the ULD's Chancellor candidate in '09. Sectori 16:19, 17 September 2007 (PDT)
I agree. Let us see what kind of person Antonia is, and where she fits into the picture more specifically. The interesting question arises--given their respective positions, why are they deciding to marry? This has got to open a huge set of political worms. And they're both professional enough to know it. Is Nicolae looking to be removed from the succession? Is she? Are they so totally in love and headstrong they believe they can make this work? Zahir 17:11, 17 September 2007 (PDT)
I think Antonia is probably pretty strongly in love, otherwise she would not even consider such a relationship, and headstrong enough to think she can push through it. On the other hand, maybe she secretly hopes that Vladescu will in fact comply with the Mantuan senate's demands and come to live in Italy, while continuing his ambassadorial work (using Oltenia as a base of operations and Italy as a home). Unlikely, perhaps, but I think that would be her hope. Perhaps this later becomes a rift between them, leading to a highly publicized and scandalous divorce (although a happy marriage would be nice).
I think it is also possible that Antonia is a sort of female Vladescu, although perhaps not quite on the same level: currently second in line (after Bianca II's son) for the throne of Mantua, and an attractive, powerful woman. Sectori 18:04, 17 September 2007 (PDT)
As I picture him, Nicolae would never wish to marry a woman who was not a powerful personality in her own right. Methinks we're on the same page there. A thought somes to my mind--the rumors of them being together might reach a fever pitch when they travel to Tejas on the same airship to attend the coronation of Juan Carlos. Speculations abound, including the legislatures of their respective nations.
Interestingly, there are some IB-specific precedents. The most obvious would be the parents of Victoria I of England and Scotland, most especially since Oltenia has Salic law whereas Mantua does not. If they do have any children, they might well name any daughters Guelph and any sons Vlas-Florea, with a treaty between their two countries specifying the details on any possible inheiritance. Heh--at least they're both Catholic!
But first and foremost, I look forward to reading your article on Antonia! Zahir 18:57, 17 September 2007 (PDT)
I have quite a bit do do at the moment, but I'll see what I can do to get going on that soon. Given Oltenia has Salic law, I would assume it would apply to any holdings of theirs within Oltenia, but not to any in Italy? Or am I misunderstanding its application? The idea of an international treaty to deal with the marriage of these two people is deeply amusing to me, especially given their relatively unimportance (if this were Italy's queen, for example, or Mantua's, for that matter...). Anyway, first things first: Antonia Guelph. Sectori 18:15, 18 September 2007 (PDT)

As I understand it, Salic Law does not prevent women from inheiriting anything except a title and whatever is entailed in that title. Thus Antonia might easily become Princess of Oltenia and Nicolae could leave her all sorts of personal property in his will--but she could not succeed to his throne, nor could she inheirit anything specific to the Principate (the Regalia, for instance, or any of the prince's castles). Zahir 21:39, 20 September 2007 (PDT)

Do you want to write the news article announcing the engagement on October 3rd? Zahir 18:23, 28 September 2007 (PDT)
Well, we missed October 3rd. Do you want to write the news article about the engagement, or shall I? Anything else you want to add to it? Zahir 12:01, 13 November 2007 (PST)
Personal tools
discussion