"Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:gdt0f3pc0qonc3l29vihbdmif8op0vb9l6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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]
> I'd count it as a vowel, if I were devising such a scheme.
It is in *English*, but I don't know about other languages. I can list
lots
of syllabic r's in English (and syllabic l's, too), but I can't think of
any
in, say, Russian (doesn't mean they don't exist, but I can't recall any
examples).
My group has for the moment voted to class it as a consonant, but perhaps
they could be persuaded to change their minds. How common is syllabic [r\]
(or [r], or [r`], etc.) in other languages?
>>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]?
There is an [m]- it's a nasal, so that sound would go with the symbol 'n'.
We made them all allophonic.
> You may not be interested in such "exotica", but surely there are some
> clicks that are universally pronounceable, if not universally used in
> languages!
I can pronounce a lot of clicks in isolation, but integrating them into
words is... non-trivial.
>>Coming soon, vowels and syllable structure....
>
> Yay!
Alright, I went and proposed a syllable structure of CV(C), just as a
starting example, and my group sort of jumped on it. So, I guess that's
what
we're going with, with slight modifications for terminals and initials.
So,
every word starts with a single consonant (it is currently under
consideration whether to allow initial consonant clusters- thoughts?), and
ends with anything at all. We're probably going to disallow most terminal
consonants in deference to languages like Japanese- better to leave in
some
(like 'n'), or just say "all words will end with vowels"?
The vowel list current stands as:
a - [a], [A], [O]
e - [e], [E], [I], [@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- [i]
o - [o]
u - [u], [y], [U]
And diphthongs:
ai - [ai], [Ai]
ei - [ei], [Ei]
oi - [oi]
ao - [ao], [au], [Ao], [Au]
Lots of allophones. And we currently have more vowel sounds than
consonants;
that bothers me a bit, though I'm not sure why. I suppose it's OK. 'ao'
seems sort of like the odd-diphthong-out. Anything that should be
rearranged/added/excluded?
-l.
------------------------------------
My inbox is a sacred shrine, none shall enter that are not worthy.
|
