I don't know if this has been discussed before. My appologies if it has. But I got to thinking about it and I don't recall it being discussed so here:

As those who have delved a bit deeply into Dragon-Tongue (Dovahzul, Dragon Language, etc. (or is it ect? I never remember.)) probably have noticed, the grammar of the conversational Dovahzul dialogue in the game (i.e. TES V: Skyrim) doesn't match up to the more poetic or literary Dovahzul. What I mean is this: in draconic things such as songs and writings, the Dovahzul words are pretty much word-for-word analogous with English (it has the exact same grammar), whilst conversation and other daily-use type Dovahzul has its own grammar.

It seems to me that we, on this site and within ourselves, could distinctly classify Dovahzul into these two categories: conversational and literary. And each one would (generally) be used for its respective purpose, instead of just fusing the two together or just using one for all usages. We would have to further establish the grammar rules for conversational Dovah Tinvaak, which wouldn't be easy , but we can do it (at least for the most part). And of  course, we could just use the English-analogous form (literary) for stuff such as poems, word walls, songs, books, translations, etc(ect?).

What think ye?

Lot kiirsehah! This is a brilliant idea. I'm all for it. Hi lost miri.

Wouldn't surprise me. Latin had a written/verbal form and I *think* so did Egyptian. At least, both had "shorthand" and the Latin we know today was solely literary in form. It's been argued that spoken Latin was different, and hence we get different Romantic languages (dialects of spoken Latin). 

But yeah, think about it. The Dragon Priests would have had their sacred texts and written language like heiroglyphs which are literally "holy engravings". Then the dragons have their own dragon tongue which Paarthurnax himself says has words in it that cannot be translated to human speech, which might also mean that such words could never be comprehended by mortals and hense not written down literally, but would rather have to be transliterated/paraphrased. Then you have human Dovahzul which would likely be some sort of inbetween of written religious texts and the speech learned from dragons by the prests. 

Then combine all that with mortal need for complex conversation and the need to talk about things like latrines, and you have a new language.

So therefore there'd likely be three forms: draconic, religious, and vulgar (mortal commonfolk).

Brynja

Wouldn't surprise me. Latin had a written/verbal form and I *think* so did Egyptian. At least, both had "shorthand" and the Latin we know today was solely literary in form. It's been argued that spoken Latin was different, and hence we get different Romantic languages (dialects of spoken Latin). 

But yeah, think about it. The Dragon Priests would have had their sacred texts and written language like heiroglyphs which are literally "holy engravings". Then the dragons have their own dragon tongue which Paarthurnax himself says has words in it that cannot be translated to human speech, which might also mean that such words could never be comprehended by mortals and hense not written down literally, but would rather have to be transliterated/paraphrased. Then you have human Dovahzul which would likely be some sort of inbetween of written religious texts and the speech learned from dragons by the prests. 

Then combine all that with mortal need for complex conversation and the need to talk about things like latrines, and you have a new language.

So therefore there'd likely be three forms: draconic, religious, and vulgar (mortal commonfolk).

I like that idea. So what makes sense to me is...

• Draconic Dovahzul is spoken by the Dov. Canonically, the language is fundamentally eternal; its lexis never changes. 
• Literary Dovahzul is spoken by the Dragon Priests. It's the word-for-word translation we see in Skyrim's main theme. This is commonly written literature, sort of in line with how we study Latin today. 
• Vulgar Dovahzul is spoken by the mortal Nords, much like Vulgar Latin was spoken by peasants who could barely read and write. This dialect is difficult to study as its written form is few and far between. 

THIS WAS A PERFECT TIME TO CHECK UP ON WHAT'S GOING ON! YES YES YES!
We need to have different dialects, with distinct rules. We already know the dragon preists called dragons dov-rah, we know feim can't just be transliterated into english, we know for a fact that Toxikyle says gjok! I completely agree to this, you wouldn't believe how many times I've confused myself with trusting the songs versus the dialouge.

Now it is time for me to leave again until probably sometime in December. I promise by then I'll have some form of literary work done. Tell Volaanir, Mirkrilaar, and Zaandalph I said, "Hi!" 

Foduiiz

• Draconic Dovahzul is spoken by the Dov. Canonically, the language is fundamentally eternal; its lexis never changes. 
• Literary Dovahzul is spoken by the Dragon Priests. It's the word-for-word translation we see in Skyrim's main theme. This is commonly written literature, sort of in line with how we study Latin today. 
• Vulgar Dovahzul is spoken by the mortal Nords, much like Vulgar Latin was spoken by peasants who could barely read and write. This dialect is difficult to study as its written form is few and far between. 

I don't believe that we know enough about the way that the dragon priests used dovahzul. And I think that the main theme would be more like the ancient Nord's dialect. So it would be easier to just classify the dragon's dialect (my proposed conversational and the above-labelled draconic) and the ancient Nord's dialect (my proposed literary/poetic and the above-labelled vulgar). I'm under the impression that the dragon priests' dialect would match one of these, or be between both of them, though I am admittedly uneducated about the matter of dragon priests.

Also, I think we should come to an agreement on what we should label these "dialects" (or "branches").

Something to think about is that what Skyrim's main theme and the Word Walls share in common is that they were both written by humans. I'd contribute the difference to the fact these Nords aren't as familiar with the language as dragons, and thus wrote along the lines of their own language.

Here's a quote from Dragon Language: Myth No More: 

It did in fact appear as if the ancient Nords had copied the language of the dragons of old, for the characters of that language very much resemble claw marks, or scratches. One can almost envision a majestic dragon using his great, sharp talons to carve the symbols into the stone itself. And a human witness - possibly even a thrall or servant - learning, observering

SIC

, so that he too could use the language for his own ends.

Hela Thrice-Versed is just hypothesizing here, but seems to think that humans learned the language through imitation rather than being taught it, which would explain a lot of differences which might appear.

Another book, Holdings of Jarl Gjalund, was clearly written by a scribe who was not very familiar with the alphabet, and neglected to use any of Dovahzul's special characters.

Looking to the Word Walls and the main theme, neither make use of grammar such as plural nouns or tense with the suffix -aan (a very common feature in dragon speech). The Word Walls sometimes use possessive suffixes. I think this also indicates a lack of familiarity with the language.

I'd eliminate Vulgar Dovahzul from the mix, since the dragon language would have been kept very strictly between the dragons and the Dragon Cult. Your average commoner wouldn't have had easy access to the language, so unlike Latin, I doubt that Dovahzul would ever have been a lingua franca to the ancient Nords. Like Hela Thrice-Versed suggests, they may have picked up words or phrases while in the Dragon Cult's service, but I don't think they would have had a reason to use it conversationally.

Effectively I see two distinctions: Dovahzul as used by dragons, and Dovahzul as used by humans. Dragons innately understand each other, so it makes sense that they would speak less and rely more on context. Humans are less familiar with the language, and rely on their own language to fill in the gaps.

I'm just thinking aloud here. I think it'd be a good idea to make the distinction.

Would this involve making a nord language? Old Hroldan was H'roldan in ancient nordic, and Ahroldan in dragon-tongue. Dov-rah was dragon, and their was another word for dragon too, which might have been derived from a prurer form of Nordic.

Mul klo riik

Would this involve making a nord language? Old Hroldan was H'roldan in ancient nordic, and Ahroldan in dragon-tongue. Dov-rah was dragon, and their was another word for dragon too, which might have been derived from a prurer form of Nordic.

Funny you should mention, Aloktaas and I have started a project of that kind. But that's a discussion for a different thread.

So in, for example, pel pals, the grammer would be analogous to english but if I were having a conversation with someone I would speak completely different?

@ZohiifDahrinZul I'd say that poems, songs, books, and memorials would be analogous with English, but conversation in general (including letters) would be more draconic. Or just have everything draconic (why do I feel like this won't happen?).