On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:31:52 -0600, "Logan Kearsley"
<chrono.surfer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>I don't typically go in for auxlangs, but I've started helping out with a
>small group project, and I'm trying to design a phonological system
that's
>as close to universally pronounceable as possible.
>
>I've started out by eliminating any consonant distinctions based on
voicing
>or aspiration, and putting together a lot of allophones. After taking out
>some other possible noises that are missing from any of the various
>languages I have appropriate knowledge of, I've got a list of 7 1/2
>consonants:
>b- labial plosive
>d- alveolarplosive
>g- glottal plosive
> j- postalveolar fricative
>v- labiodental fricative
>z- alveolar fricative
>n- nasal
>r- any of r, r\, r`, r\`, l, l`, or l\ (counted half at the moment
because
>r's and l's can be syllabic)
>
>How does that look so far? Would it be a really good idea to make 'r'
firmly
>consonantal, or is it OK to let it be syllabic?
It's syllabic/vocalic in English as is -- it's just a coloured [@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'd count it as a vowel, if I were devising such a scheme.
>Anything that I should take
>away or add?
I would add the fricative analogue to [g] (sorry I don't recall the
IPA off hand). Might also add the stop analogue to your "j" -- I guess
that would be [?], glottal stop, or else voiced [q]. Why no [m]?
You may not be interested in such "exotica", but surely there are some
clicks that are universally pronounceable, if not universally used in
languages!
>Coming soon, vowels and syllable structure....
Yay!
Padraic
>
>-l.
>------------------------------------
>My inbox is a sacred shrine, none shall enter that are not worthy.
>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
