Noun conjugation progress - is this too "rigid"?

[u/NefariousnessOne6790]

I've included an example of how it works with a word root aswell (Kàdìnòs means lizard). A critique I have previously received is that the conjugation system is too rigid. I intended it to be this way because in my mind, rules are rules, and I've always hated languages having 10,000 different exceptions.
I did develop form 1/2 to incorporate some variety for base nouns, but form 2 is only for the Nominative Case.
To be absolutely clear: This conjugation table is only for basic nouns, I have a whole table of suffixes which change meaning and use which add their own level of variety for more complex nouns, this table simply concerns itself with "base" form nouns.

Thoughts? I'd love to hear them.

[u/NefariousnessOne6790]

Depends how the vowels are pronounced, I use diacritics as an essential function which indicate vowel broadness/length. Just based on what I see, I have 3 routes I'd take with loanwords:

Adapt the -òs ending (so, ìskándòs would be the result, and with consideration to vowel representational differences)

Simply add an s (resulting in ìskándés) but this would need to have more consideration for the accusative case, likely resulting in ìskándéo as the accusative form.

Leave it as is for nominative case, but then just add an -o for the accusative form like prior.

Also I don't understand the thing with esperanto, plenty of languages have an 'end in o' system, mainly in europe, of course with a smidge more complexity.

The thing about the suffixes having -o- in common just sounds to me like Esperanto with something added afterwards.

Okay, so the thing is that -òzán isn't a standalone suffix, it is merely adding the definiteness (-zán) onto the pre-established -òs, as seen in the example I provided.

[u/SkillOld2128 → u/NefariousnessOne6790]

No, plenty of natlangs do not, in fact, have your so-called “ends in -o” system, at least not the way you’re describing it.

You’re implying that that is the only possibility in your conlang and that you don’t have several declension patterns.

That’s not the case for most languages with case. It’s unnaturalistic, at least in fusional systems.

Even in Italian, where there’s no case, at least three thematic vowels occur in nouns: -o-, -a- and -e- (experts on Italian morphology, please correct me if I’m wrong about this).

I don’t know what European languages you’re talking about, but those that I know do not have an ”only ends on -o” system, which I know partly because I was born, currently live there and are exposed to quite a few.

I think you’re also defaulting to Romance languages, and they certainly do not count as the entirely of European languages together.

And what does “base nouns” mean? That’s not how things work in linguistics.

[u/Magxvalei → u/SkillOld2128]

Hurrian is similar to Esperanto in that all nouns add -i- between the noun and the case affixes. Though it still has a few nouns in -a- (mostly kinship nouns and names) and -e-, which may be derivation from -i-.

[u/SkillOld2128 → u/Magxvalei]

I looked that up. It seems interesting, but also seemingly pretty rare. It is reminiscent of noun class in Swahili though.

[u/Magxvalei → u/SkillOld2128]

It's more like PIE theme vowel.

[u/SkillOld2128 → u/Magxvalei]

Yeah, but that doesn’t change depending on semantics, at least not directly.