The fun fact is that i teach old norse (and therefore am quite good at icelandic) and that indeed linguistics is my hobby. (comparative linguistivs mainly)
And as said, yes words were invented but not ONLY for the sake pf poetry. Take Dickens and his fellow who made a "poetry duell" who could create the most new english words. The intention of creating words was indeed rhyme and later on the contest but the words really were new words not invented synonyms. They added new words to english that had no english word for them before. Some were invented as slang words for special characters in their stories and slang words usually derive from actual words rather than being totally made up.
Its really extremely rare that 1 thing has 2 different words for it, in all cases i can think of either the 2 words come from different languages OR really describe 2 different, yet similiar, things.
And dovahzul as you said, is meant to be unchanging, eternal. That means there wont be new words added later on for the sake of poetry - the language started and never changed since, as language of the aedra and the fantasy background we can assume that really is how it happened. Akathosh made it up and said this language will be the same for eternity.
I dont know enough on old english poetry to be certain there but i cant think of making up totally new words just for a rhyme - a poet wants to transfer a meaning. if its just about rhyme i could go "trk zrk prk, klk!" and declare these are now english words that mean "i can rhyme, really!" and i doubt that would have any impact on the english language. Dickens had as his books spread far and wide and the words were very characteristic - and they were not create for rhyme.
Also from a language of divine beings i would expect some logic behind it ^^
@gtfobro Yes Bethesda did but that is a lame explanation for a language that is supposed to be divine, eternal and powerfull. Yes ultimately Dovahzul is as it is because unprofessional amateurs gave up on creating a complex language. But while this is the simple truth, isnt it worth the effort to get some "in game explanation" for it?
I am trying to get into the mind of a dov, not just into the mind of a bethesda guy. Id like the language to become alive, and in itself complete and logical. Just like people speaking sindarin try to get into the mind of the elfs and not of Tolkien. And if there were errors made in the creation, they should be corrected or explained satisfactory.
As said if 2 words are seemingly the same like shul and krein and bethesda seemingly didnt think about it...why not CREATE a difference that makes sense? i think its a good idea to do so. Sinvaak could be a beast like a monster and sunvaar could be a beast in terms of a wild animal.
unslaad could be ceaseless and Unahzaal unending - there is a difference, anyone who is into WoW lore will know it is a huge difference if you are undead or undying. To an uninformed outsider that may be the same, but the difference is pretty much as big as male and female. Just like magic, sorcery and magick are 3 very different things for modern occultists.
paarthurnax explained to me that dov - ah is different from dovah just like car ist not a carpet. so dovah-kiin and not dov-ah-kiin. same sound different meaning. a carpet is not a small car that you gotta feed and walk like a dog.
But the fun part is that dov-ah-kiin actually does make more sense for the skyrim guy as he really hunts dov and is born to hunt dov. However previous dragonborn did not hunt dov, like Talos or Cyrodiil so the hunting dov thing really just applies to the last dragonborn not all of them therefore dov-ah-kiin seems to be wrong.
But i would have prefered another term than "dragonchild" dragonsoul, dragonblood or dragonkin makes more sense than dragonborn / dragonchild in my mind. He/she was seemingly not given birth by a dragon
linguistic detail....like why do we use word A in this case and word B in that case like with fin and faal. Like an examination what words actually mean - as paarthurnax said "ah" does not simply mean hunter hunter is merely the closest english translation.
From my language knowledge i can see that very well, translating a text will change its meaning, there is no other way. Each language is based on the mindest of its speakers and since a different people have a different mindest you simply can not translate a text without changing its meaning. That is why many religious people demand you gotta read the qran in arabic or the bible in greek, translations simply do change the text.
As example the english word mind is a word that encompasses about 50 german words. Germans translating "mind" have to sacrifice 49 meanings of mind in favor of one, making 49 mistakes in a single word.
Details are also like whats the difference between shul and krein, or why does grammar rule x apply in situation a but not in b. Real languages have changes that we know of and can explain, and trace back to a degree we can reconstruct languages of which we have no written evidence at all. Yes first its important to create new words, grammar and make dovahzul better known and consistant in its sounds so the details of linguistics dont really matter much for now but i think its still important in the long run