Improper Implementation of Culture.

[SBolshevik]

If foreign language is substrate, it would keep names of base language but with some fonetic change (I.e. Belarussian uses a instead of o because of Baltic substrate).

Where do you find a basis for this? In that they write, say, píva and Hródna, instead of pívo and Hródno? Because if that's your reasoning, I have to tell you that that's just phonetic spelling of reduced /o/. The only reason Russian doesn't do that is because it has dialects which keep unnaccented /o/ as [o].

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

Where do you find a basis for this? In that they write, say, píva and Hródna, instead of pívo and Hródno? Because if that's your reasoning, I have to tell you that that's just phonetic spelling of reduced /o/. The only reason Russian doesn't do that is because it has dialects which keep unnaccented /o/ as [o].

Well, he's wrong about the specific example, but when a new language enters an area and displaces a substrate, features of the substrate's sound system usually find their way into the language, because a significant proportion of the speakers of the new language in the area are speakers of the old language, who learned it with an accent. Like the stereotypical Irish accent, every famous feature of which is an echo of the Irish-language-based accents of the first wave of Irishmen to switch to English.

 

[SBolshevik]

Well, he's wrong about the specific example, but when a new language enters an area and displaces a substrate, features of the substrate's sound system usually find their way into the language, because a significant proportion of the speakers of the new language in the area are speakers of the old language, who learned it with an accent. Like the stereotypical Irish accent, every famous feature of which is an echo of the Irish-language-based accents of the first wave of Irishmen to switch to English.

In addition to that, entire grammatical features can find their way into the new superstrate language, like do-support coming into English from Celtic langs.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

In addition to that, entire grammatical features can find their way into the new superstrate language, like do-support coming into English from Celtic langs.

That actually almost certainly didn't come into English via Celtic. The gradual shift to do-support can be seen in writing through the Late Medieval to early Modern periods.

But yes, it's possible. The habitual-be in Irish English was lifted straight outta Gaelic.

 

[Narvait]

Where do you find a basis for this? In that they write, say, píva and Hródna, instead of pívo and Hródno? Because if that's your reasoning, I have to tell you that that's just phonetic spelling of reduced /o/. The only reason Russian doesn't do that is because it has dialects which keep unnaccented /o/ as [o].

This is quite widespread myth common in many history/ linguistic amateur forums that I never bothered to double check on.

Now when I started to google up, I noticed this list which does not contain akanye. Will check up more, because there must have been at least some sort of theory behind this.

Spoiler

Due to Baltic linguistic substrate [in Belarusian], modern Lithuanian and Belarusian languages have a number of common features in phonetics, morphology and syntax. These include

- positional softness of consonants;
- jotacija[1] at confluence of vowels;
- vocative case;
- comparative degree of adjectives and adverbs with preposition 'for' (за);
- a particular form of imperative for the expression of the joint action;
- fractional numbers;
-structural and semantic proximity of some pronouns;
- common valence of some verbs in a construction such as 'хворому палепшала' (ill person got better)
- preferential use of genitive case in negation using verb 'мець' (to have)
- literal matching of combinations such as 'ставiць хату' (to build a house)
- and other features
Войніч I., Свяжынскі У. Літоўская мова. / Беларуская мова (Энцыклапедыя). Мн., 1994, с. 314.

So now we have to write a script for phonological interference across an entire name list, on top of the script for adapting name borrowings. Possible, yes. Cool, yes. But a bitch to do right, and irritating to some (well, at least me) if done wrong.

Also, superstrates generally don't affect phonetics, or really, anything but vocabulary, of the language they assimilate into, unless it's by adding new phonemes. I can't think of any significant Germanic influence on Western Romance phonology, and French had only the smallest effect on English phonology (the biggest one is introducing /v/ as a sound at the beginning of words, and not just as a variant of /f/ after vowels).

Guess it depends on how big superstrate/substrate population is relative to hosts.
It could be that superstrate is more about loanwords/ adapted personal names, and substrate about (some) phonetic change.

 

[SBolshevik]

This is quite widespread myth common in many history/ linguistic amateur forums that I never bothered to double check on.

Now when I started to google up, I noticed this list which does not contain akanye. Will check up more, because there must have been at least some sort of theory behind this.

Spoiler

Due to Baltic linguistic substrate [in Belarusian], modern Lithuanian and Belarusian languages have a number of common features in phonetics, morphology and syntax. These include

- positional softness of consonants;
- jotacija[1] at confluence of vowels;
- vocative case;
- comparative degree of adjectives and adverbs with preposition 'for' (за);
- a particular form of imperative for the expression of the joint action;
- fractional numbers;
-structural and semantic proximity of some pronouns;
- common valence of some verbs in a construction such as 'хворому палепшала' (ill person got better)
- preferential use of genitive case in negation using verb 'мець' (to have)
- literal matching of combinations such as 'ставiць хату' (to build a house)
- and other features
Войніч I., Свяжынскі У. Літоўская мова. / Беларуская мова (Энцыклапедыя). Мн., 1994, с. 314.

Quite a few of those things are generally Slavic or perhaps Balto-Slavic, like softness, vocative, iotation, negative genitive (used in general when it comes to negation in East Slavic langs), etc.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

Guess it depends on how big superstrate/substrate population is relative to hosts.
It could be that superstrate is more about loanwords/ adapted personal names, and substrate about (some) phonetic change.

Pretty much. The sizes also influence whether or not it will be either a superstrate or substrate situation. A small intrusive population is less likely to shift the language of the native population, and their language will serve as a superstrate on the local tongue. Whereas if you have a larger proportion of the population speaking the socially dominant language, you may actually see large numbers of natives switch to the new language, which will work change in it.

 

[ahyangyi]

The issue here is that for Bedouin Spanish mix it should be neither Jesus nor Isa, but something in between.

For a mixed language, unless it's a creole, it usually still has a "primary one" which provides grammar and a "secondary one" which provides some vocabulary. English had Anglo-Saxon as its primary and French as its secondary.

Real world Maltese could be seen as an example of a mixed Arabic-Sicilian language, with Arabic being the primary (providing the grammar) and Sicilian being the secondary. One could argue Spanish is the other way around, being mostly Latin-derived but having lots of loanwords from Arabic.

 

[ahyangyi]

Will think out loud.
What is melting pot is usually a base language heavily (or not so heavily) influenced by foreign language.
Theoretically that makes two possible outcomes for 2 involved languages
Arabic infuenced Norse
Or
Norse influenced Arabic

Then we have different relations.
Base language has a foreign substrate (culture expands into foreign province)
Base language has a foreign superstrate (culture has foreign elite that gets assimilated)
That makes four outcomes:
Norse with Arabic substrate
Norse with Arabic superstrate
Arabic with Norse substrate
Arabic with Norse superstrate

If foreign language is substrate, it would keep names of base language but with some fonetic change (I.e. Belarussian uses a instead of o because of Baltic substrate).
If foreign language is superstrate, then base language would assimilate foreign names, but also change some or many of its own fonetics.

Just putting it there to think about it more

Cool.

 

[Narvait]

One simplistic approach would be to come up with combinations not for language vs language, but language group vs language group for neighbors.
And use real life outcomes.
For example Arab base Latin foreign = <some cool geographically unrelated name> (modern Maltese name list), etc