The Correspondence Library

[Shane Henry]

Early Modern English to Appalachian?

Shane

P.S. This thread is one of the most meaty lists of linguistic lore on the entire internet. Won't someone please compile all these sound change tables on a website?

[masako]

Won't someone please compile all these sound change tables on a website?

I thought this was a website?

[Tengado]

Won't someone please compile all these sound change tables on a website?

I thought this was a website?

Heh Heh I think he was emphasising the compile - currently you have to trawl through 11 pages to see if the ones you want are here.

[Whimemsz]

I had always intended to complete the work started by others in transfering all this info to the KQ. But so far I haven't.

[Lleu]

I had always intended to complete the work started by others in transferring all this info to the KQ. But so far I haven't.

Someone please do so.

EDIT: I can't bear looking through all of 12 pages, the first eight or nine of which have many special symbols missing.

[jmcd]

I have looked through it all and sure took a lot of time and was difficult without some of the right symbols.

[johanpeturdam]

Here are some very basic vowel changes from Old Norse to Faroese. They're just general, and would probably not apply for all instances:

ON -> FO

a -> stressed/long: [Ea], unstressed/short: [a]
á -> stressed/long: [Oa] (except NE of the Faroes): [a:], short: [O]
e -> stressed/long: [e:], short [E]
é -> stressed/long: [Ea], except Suðuroy [e:], short [a] except Suðuroy [E]
i -> stressed/long: [i:], short: , unstressed: [e]/[E]/[@] (need someone else's opinion)
í -> stressed/long: [Ui], short [Ui]/
o -> stressed/long: [o:], short [O]
ó -> stressed/long: [Ou]/[Eu]/[9u], short [9] except Suðuroy [O]
* -> -ógv [Egv] except Suðuroy [Ogv]
u -> stressed/long: [u:], short: , unstressed [o]/[O]
ú -> stressed/long: [}u], short: [Y]
y -> stressed/long: [i:], short:
ý -> stressed/long: [Ui], short [Ui]/
œ -> stressed/long: [2:], short: [9], except Suðuroy [Y]
ǫ -> as œ, except infront of n/m where it merged with o

Very rough, and very unacademic, but it's a pointer at least, right?

[Rui]

It would be very much appreciated if someone could fix this post, because I need the correct Latin > French sound changes and don't want to guess at the values of the ?s (I've figured out a few of them, but most of them, I have no idea)

Thanks

[Yaali Annar]

I tried to compile once, but many of the character in there is a question mark (I recall it has to do with some porting of the forum and what not) so I can't make head and tail out of it.

[Dewrad]

I had an idea.

Much of the earlier part of this thread is unusable because of the disappearing special characters. Getting the original posters to edit their posts to correct the question marks all over the place would be rather difficult, particularly as several are no longer regular members.

However, I know that moderators can edit posts and I know there's a document which collected most of the earlier ones.

So, is there a moderator who'd be willing to go through and do the requisite editing?

[pharazon]

I had an idea.

Much of the earlier part of this thread is unusable because of the disappearing special characters. Getting the original posters to edit their posts to correct the question marks all over the place would be rather difficult, particularly as several are no longer regular members.

However, I know that moderators can edit posts and I know there's a document which collected most of the earlier ones.

So, is there a moderator who'd be willing to go through and do the requisite editing?

I'll do it. Not until tomorrow though, and I won't exactly be crushed if I don't get to, so if any other moderator wants to do it before then I encourage them.

[LoneWolf]

Anyone got sound changes for Q-Celtic to Old Irish? I would very much appreciate.

[Whimemsz]

I had an idea.

Much of the earlier part of this thread is unusable because of the disappearing special characters. Getting the original posters to edit their posts to correct the question marks all over the place would be rather difficult, particularly as several are no longer regular members.

However, I know that moderators can edit posts and I know there's a document which collected most of the earlier ones.

So, is there a moderator who'd be willing to go through and do the requisite editing?

Maknas is the one who has a document version, I believe.

[saffecool]

I request Proto-Germanic to Swedish. I hope someone knows something i can use.

[4pq1injbok]

As for compilation, there's no need to duplicate this information elsewhere. A (regularly updated) index post bearing an organized list of links to all the others should be sufficient.

Anyone wanna create one?

[brandrinn]

Proto Uralic > Mordvin
(all of this comes from a very cryptic text over 50 years old, so much f it is probably wrong)

Affricates become sibilants
/tS/ > /S/
/ts_j/ > /s_j/

Semi-vowels disappear in some environments
/j/F > F
/w/B > B

Palatalization is lost in most cases
/D_j/ > /l_j/ > /l/
/l_j/ > /l/
/n_j/ > /n/

Stops break down intervocally (combinations not mentioned generally remain unchanged or cannot be reconstructed in enough detail)
V/k/V > V/G/V > F/j/V or B/v/V
V/kk/V > V/k/V (?)
V/t/V > V/d/V
V/tt/V > V/t/V
V/kt/V > V/ft/V
V/p/V > V/v/V
V/pt/V > V/ft/V

Sibilants voice intervocally
V/s_j/V > V/z_j/V
V/s/V > V/z/V
V/S/V > V/Z/V

Miscellaneous
/D/ > /d/
V/N/V > F/j/V or B/v/V or VV

And the vowels:

There is confusion between the mid and high vowels.
/o/ > /u/
/7/ > /o/ or /u/
/u/ > /o/, sometimes /u/
/e/ > /i/ or /e/
/i/ > /e/ (but F/i/ remains unchanged)
/y/ >/e/, sometimes /o/

Vowels in non-initial syllables merge.
/a/ > /7/ (unless first syllable had /u/)
/{/ > /@/
/7/ > /7/
/e/ > /@/
(this leaves /7/ and /@/, depending on harmony, as the only non-initial vowels, except for a few cases of /a/)

[Soap]

Why is the Italian word for office ufficio? I didnt see anything in http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.p ... 902#294902 about initial /o/ going to /u/, although there is a mention of a sporadic shift of /au/ to /u/. Is it a loanword from a dialect or is it an irregular?

[Whimemsz]

I'm afraid that even in the professional scholarly community, even among world-level universities, insufficient work has been done to give you what you're asking for. No such sound change list exists, for any of the protolanguages above. The best that can be had anywhere is, at most, a list of correspondences between individual daughter-languages. And I've done some looking around myself, and can't tell you where to find anything like that except possibly a university library somewhere.

If you want a detailed list of actual sound changes from proto-Athapaskan, your options are either to wait years or decades for linguists to get around to it, or else to investigate the matter yourself. :?

Well, what about works by Edward Sapir, Pliny E. Goddard, Heinz-Jürgen Pinnow, Michael E. Krauss, Jeff Leer, Egon Renner, Michael Dürr, etc.?

The problem is I can't obtain the book here in the Czech Republic. I haven't found a single library that would have at least one paper on Athapascan languages.

I've read several articles whose authors seem to operate with what looks like well-established regular correspondences (proposed mostly by Krauss or Leer, as far as I can remember). Proto-Athapascan sound changes would really suffice, if anybody knew them and could send them to me...

Anyway, thank you for your response.

Best,

Petusek

I actually made some photocopies of some of the changes from Proto-Athabaskan to the northern Athabaskan languages, given in the Handbook of North American Indians, a little while back. I'll try to give them here as soon as I can.

[Petusek]

I'm afraid that even in the professional scholarly community, even among world-level universities, insufficient work has been done to give you what you're asking for. No such sound change list exists, for any of the protolanguages above. The best that can be had anywhere is, at most, a list of correspondences between individual daughter-languages. And I've done some looking around myself, and can't tell you where to find anything like that except possibly a university library somewhere.

If you want a detailed list of actual sound changes from proto-Athapaskan, your options are either to wait years or decades for linguists to get around to it, or else to investigate the matter yourself.

Well, what about works by Edward Sapir, Pliny E. Goddard, Heinz-Jürgen Pinnow, Michael E. Krauss, Jeff Leer, Egon Renner, Michael Dürr, etc.?

The problem is I can't obtain the book here in the Czech Republic. I haven't found a single library that would have at least one paper on Athapascan languages.

I've read several articles whose authors seem to operate with what looks like well-established regular correspondences (proposed mostly by Krauss or Leer, as far as I can remember). Proto-Athapascan sound changes would really suffice, if anybody knew them and could send them to me...

Anyway, thank you for your response.

Best,

Petusek

I actually made some photocopies of some of the changes from Proto-Athabaskan to the northern Athabaskan languages, given in the Handbook of North American Indians, a little while back. I'll try to give them here as soon as I can.

Wonderful! Thanks a lot in advance!

Best wishes,

Petusek

[Whimemsz]

Okay, so these are from Michael Krauss and Victor Golla (1981) "Northern Athapaskan Languages", pp. 67-85 of Handbook of North American Indians vol. 6 (Subarctic).

Now, I don't think these are all the changes in the various Northern Athabaskan languages. Rather, they seem to be the most important ones, and tend to be chosen from the types of sound changes considered by Krauss and Golla to be the most ... wosscalled ... of Athabaskan languages (vowel changes, tone developments, changes involving the PA affricate and prevelar/uvular stop series).

So, the phonology of Proto-Athabaksan (PA) distinguished plain, aspirated, and glottalized stops/affricates and voiceless and voiced fricatives, at several points of articulation, or better, "series": dental stop, dental affricate or fricative, lateral, palatal, labialized palatal, (front) velar, uvular/postvelar, labialized uvular/labialized postvelar, and glottal ("laryngeal"). There were also several sonorants. The consonant system of PA (arranged somewhat differently from Krauss & Golla's presentation) can be seen on the Wikipedia page. The sonorants as reconstructed by Krauss & Golla, however, are */n w ̃w j ̃j/ (X-SAMPA */n w w~ j j~/; they do say that */w~ j~/ may have been */m/ and */ɲ/ or */ŋ/, respectively).

Anyway, so the way K&G present the consonant system is kind of important for how they present the sound changes. As I said, they break the obstruents down into seven series:

1) Dental stops : *t, *tʰ, *t’
2) Lateral : *tɬ, *tɬʰ, *tɬ’, *ɬ, *l
3) Dental affricates/fricatives : *ʦ, *ʦʰ, *ʦ’, *s, *z
4) Palatal : *ʧ, *ʧʰ, *ʧ’, *ʃ, *ʒ
5) Labialized palatal : *ʧʷ, *ʧʷʰ, *ʧ’ʷ, *ʃʷ, *ʒʷ
6) (Front) velar : *k, *kʰ, *k’, *x, *ɣ
7) Uvular : *q, *qʰ, *q’, *χ, *ʁ
8) Labialized uvular : *qʷ, *qʷʰ, *q’ʷ, *χʷ, *ʁʷ
9) Glottal : *ʔ, *h

(Series (5) is reconstructed by some as a retroflex series: *tʂ, *tʂʰ, etc.)

All members of the same series generally undergo the same changes/mergers/etc. So the changes are abbreviated by using the plain/voiceless member of each series to stand for the entire series. So the nine series are abbreviated using:

1) *t
2) *tɬ
3) *ʦ
4) *ʧ
5) *ʧʷ
6) *k
7) *q
8) *qʷ
9) (I'm not sure about this)

There's an additional series present in some of the daughter languages, consisting of dentals (or interdentals?): tθ, tθʰ, tθ’, θ, ð. This series is abbreviated with tθ. Additionally, in a few languages there is a retroflex(?) series, abbreviated with tʂ.

Vowels could be plain, or have "glottal constriction" (symbolized with V’). There were two kinds of vowels: "full" (*i, *e, *u, *a) and "reduced" (written *α, *ə, and *ʋ).

Another thing to keep in mind is that K&G write the PA plain stops/affricates as if they were voiced (d, g, etc.) and the aspirated ones as if they were voiceless (t, k, etc.), so in some cases in the daughter language forms cited I'm unsure whether a "d" represents [d], or [t], or if a "t" represents [t] or [tʰ]. In those cases I've gone with the plain voiceless, and aspirated, respectively (and so on), except in cases where the sound in question descends from a nasal, where I treat "ⁿd", "d", etc. as [ⁿd] and [d], etc.

<hr>
SOUND CHANGES

In the changes, notations like *ʦ can be assumed to stand for the entire obstruent series unless I note otherwise. Changes in obstruents can be assumed to refer only to stem-initial obstruents unless otherwise indicated. C = consonants, V = vowels, S = stops, ’ = glottalization/constriction, L = sonorants (see above), F = fricatives.

Ahtna

*ʦ, *ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → k (→ ʧ in the Mentasta dialect)
*q → q
*s, *ʃ, *ʃʷ, *x (individual sounds, not series) → s
*i → i, i:
*e → e, e:
*a → a, a:
*u → u, u:
*α → a
*ə → e
*ʋ → o
*C’ → unchanged /stem-finally
*V’ → V [vowel constriction lost]
No tone

Dena'ina (K&G's "Tanaina")

*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʧ (→ ʦ in the Upper Inlet dialect)
*i, *u → i ([ɪ])
*e → a
*a → u ([ʊ])
*α, *ə, *ʋ → ə
*s, *ʃ, *ʃʷ, *x (individual sounds, not series) → s
*z, *ʒ, *ʒʷ, *ɣ (individual sounds, not series) → j
*k → k
*q → q
*C’ → unchanged /stem-finally
*V’ → V
No tone

Deg Hit'an (K&G's "Ingalik")

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → tʂ (→ ʦ in the Kuskokwim dialect)
*q → q
*k → k or ʧ (apparently "for reasons not fully understood")
*w → v (→ w in the Shageluk dialect)
*̃w (m) → m
*̃̃j (ɲ) → ŋ
*L, *F → [-voiced] /_# if suffixal (e.g., PA *ʧʷen, "day" > [tʂan̥])
*Cə → C[+voiced +syllabic] /_# if suffixal (e.g., PA *ɬuq’ə, "fish" > [ɬɛ:ɢ̩])
*i, *u → i ([ɪ])
*e → a
*a → u ([ʊ])
*α, *ə, *ʋ → ə
*C’ → C /stem-finally
*V’ → V
No tone

Koyukon

*e → a ([æ])
*a → o ([ɔ])
*α → ŏ (this is the symbol K&G use--I'm not positive what it refers to)
*ʋ → ŭ
*ʦ → tɬ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
Some stem-final consonant suffixes in clusters are preserved (e.g., PA *kə’s-ɬ "fishhook" → /kiɬtɬ(ʰ?)/; PA *ʧ’ʷə-ɣə-ʔα’ʃ-ɬ, "we walk along" → /ʦ’oʔŏstɬ(ʰ?)/; PA *jə-ɬ-ʔαʃ-x, "he sneezes" → /jiɬŏsk(ʰ?)/) (in the Minchumina-Bearpaw subdialect of the Upper Koyukon dialect, the clusters are not preserved)
*k → k (→ ʧ in the Upper Koyukon dialect)
*q → q
*C’ → C /stem-finally
*V’ → V[low tone] (tone subsequently lost in all dialects but Lower Koyukon)
*w → m /_Vn (sometimes)
*w → b (→ m in Lower Koyukon)
*ə → Ø /L_#, F_# (when suffixal) (Lower Koyukon only) [I'm not sure if I'm reading their description of this change correctly]

Holikachuk

Phonologically quite similar to Koyukon (specifically Lower Koyukon), to the extent that the two are partially mutually-intelligible. K&G only list the differences between Holikachuk and Lower Koyukon:
*ʦ → tθ (rather than → tɬ)
*e → a /prefixal

The vowels seem to be somewhat different, however, though K&G don't mention this in the text (only show it in a table of vowel developments):
*i → e
*e → a
*a → ɔ
*u → o
*α, *ʋ → ŭ

Kolchan (Upper Kuskokwim)

*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → tʂ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*e → a ([æ])
*a → o
*α, *ʋ → ŭ
*C’ → C’ /stem-finally (sometimes)
*V’ → V
No tone

Lower Tanana

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → tʂ
*k → ʧ (but → k stem-finally)
*q → k
*S’ → S /stem-finally
*V’ → V[low tone] (since then partially neutralized in noun and verb stems, but "still clear in verbal prefixes")
*e → æ
*a → ɔ
*α, *ʋ → ŭ

Tanacross

K&G define the changes to Tanacross by the features that distinguish it from Upper Tanana:
*V’ → V[high tone] (not low tone)
Development of length contrast in full vowels
*n, *̃j (ɲ) → ⁿd
*Ṽj (Vɲ)→ V[nasalized]j
*j → ʒ
Voiced stem-initial fricatives devoiced (*l, *z, *ʒ, *ʒʷ, *ɣ, *ʁ, *ʁʷ → ɬ, s, ʃ, ʃʷ, x, χ, χʷ), though apparently they remain distinctively lenis
1sg subject prefix *-ʃ- → -h-
Classifier *-ɬ- → -h-

The vowel developments to Tanacross were also somewhat different:
*e → e ([ɪ])
*α → æ̆ or ă
̆*ə → æ̆
*ʋ → ŏ

Upper Tanana

Upper Tanana is apparently quite similar to Tanacross, with the main difference being the loss of many stem-final fricatives and affricates (sometimes with compensatory diphthongization). For example, PA *t’e’ʃʷ "charcoal" → Lower Tanana t’̀æʂ, Tanacross t’e:s, but Upper Tanana t’ea.

The vowel system is significantly different as well (apparently, vowels also develop a length distinction):
*i → i or ea
*e → e or ea
*a → a or ɨ
*u → u or iu
*α → a or ɨ
*ə → a or ɨ (but → ë in the Northway dialect, though I'm not sure what that represents)
*ʋ → o

*V’ → V[low tone] (subsequently lost among young speakers by 1980)

Han

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → tʂ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
In some cases, members of some series (especially the *t, *tɬ, and *tθ series) palatalize before high vowels.
*n → ⁿd (or → d) /_V[non-nasal], when stem-initial
*j → ʒ /stem-initially
*a → æ
*α → a
*ə → ə or ë
*ʋ → o
Vowel length develops
*V’ → V[low tone]

There is an enormous reduction of stem-final consonants, with the only permitted stem-final consonants allowed in modern Han being /t k w j r n h ʔ/ (and also /l/, in the Dawson dialect). For example, PA *təɬ, "blood" → /taw/ (Eagle dialect) or /tal/ (Dawson dialect); PA *-ʧ’ʋʧ’, "elbow" → -/ʦ’àh/.

Gwich'in (K&G's "Kutchin")

*ʦ → tθ or, if palatalized, → ʧ (Eastern Kutchin) or k (Western Kutchin)
*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → tʂ
*k → ʧ or, if palatalized, → ʦ̱ (Eastern Kutchin--a sound between [ʦ] and [ʧ]) or ʦ (Western Kutchin)
*q → k

Some examples of the palatalizing of some of the series (which evidently happened before front vowels?) in different dialects: PA *ʦʰe "stone" → Eastern [ʧʰi:] / Western [kʰi:]; PA *-kʰeʔ "tail" → Eastern -[ʦ̱ʰìʔ] / Western -[ʦʰìʔ].

*w → v
*j → ʒ
*n, *̃j (ɲ) → ⁿd ~ ⁿʤ (if palatalized) /__V[non-nasal] (e.g., PA *təne "person" → /tiⁿʤi:/)
*i, *e → i ("but diphthongized to ia with the loss of certain stem-finals")
*a → i or e
*u → iu
*α, ə → a
*ʋ → o
*V’ → V[low tone]
An "extensive reduction" of stem-final consonants; however, reflexes of final *-̃j (ɲ) and *-n after PA *a and *e are kept distinct (e.g., PA *-tʰan "handle stick (perfective stem)" → -/tʰin/; PA *-ʔãj (*-ʔaɲ) "handle small object (perfective stem)" → -/ʔãĩ/).

Tutchone

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ (however, the sound /x/ remains a (fronted) velar, "at least in some dialects")
*q → k
*e → e (Southern Tutchone) or i (Northern Tutchone)
*a → a (Southern Tutchone) or e (Northern Tutchone)
*α, *ə, *ʋ → a or o
"Drastic" reduction of stem-final obstruents, with most consonants being lost (but in Northern Tutchone reflexes of stem-final *-ʧ and *-ʧʷ are distinct: PA *weʃʷ "knife" → /mbrà/; PA *ɬe’ʧʰ "dust" → /ɬjóʔ/)
*V’ → V[high tone] (Northern Tutchone) or V[low tone] (Southern Tutchone)
Nasalized vowels and diphthongs develop
A "secondary vowel" develops (o in Northern Tutchone and ɨ in Southern Tutchone)

In Southern Tutchone only, "affricates and fricatives merge" (so *ʦ, *z → ð; *ʦʰ, *s → θ, etc.).

Slavey-Hare and Dogrib

I'm going to treat each of the four main Slavey-Hare dialects (Slavey, Bearlake, Mountain, and Hare) separately, since they're fairly distinct (since K&G tread Dogrib with Slavey-Hare, I'm including it here as well).

A change common to all the dialects and Dogrib is a huge reduction of stem-final consonants. According to K&G, "In Slavey-Hare a few final consonants occur as underlying segments, preserved before suffixes but neutralized to -h or -ʔ in word-final position. In Dogrib, only -h occurs as a stem-final consonant in any environment." Also common to all are the vowel developments (for the most part): *α → a; *ə → e (→ ɛ in Bearlake); *ʋ → o.

Slavey (dialect of Slavey-Hare)

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k

Bearlake (dialect of Slavey-Hare)

*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k

The dental series (*ʦ) changes to a labial one, with the changes (sounds now, not series!):

*ʦ → kʷ
*ʦʰ → kʷʰ
*ʦ’ → kʷ’
*s → ʍ
*z → w

Mountain (dialect of Slavey-Hare)

*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k

The dental series (*ʦ) changes to a labial one, with the changes (sounds now, not series!):

*ʦ → p
*ʦʰ → pʰ
*ʦ’ → p’
*s → f
*z → v

Dogrib (grouped with Slavey-Hare)

*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*u → i

The dental series (*ʦ) changes to a labial one, with the changes (sounds now, not series!):

*ʦ → kʷ
*ʦʰ → kʷʰ
*ʦ’ → kʷ’
*s → ʍ
*z → w

Hare (dialect of Slavey-Hare)

*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ (exceptions: see below)
*k → ʧ (exceptions: see below)
*q → k
*e → ie
*ɬ, *l → l

The dental series (*ʦ) changes to a labial one, with the changes (sounds now, not series!):

*ʦ → kʷ or p
*ʦʰ → f
*ʦ’ → w’
*s → w
*z → w

More changes involving sounds, rather than series, and which deal with aspirates merging with fricatives (these are the "exceptions" mentioned above):

*tɬʰ → ɬ
*ʧʰ, *ʧʷʰ → s
*kʰ → ʃ

Chipewyan

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*t (sound, not series) → k (in some communities)
Affricates and glottalized obstruents → fricatives /stem-finally
*α → a
*ʋ → o
*V’ → V[high tone]

Beaver

*ʦ → tθ (further → ʦ in most communities)
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*t → ʧ /_*i, *e, *u (in British Columbian Beaver) (e.g., PA *tʰu "water" → Doig Beaver /ʧʰu/)
*n, *̃j (ɲ) → d (further → ʤ in British Columbia Beaver) /_V[non-nasal], if stem-initial (e.g., PA *nu "island" → Boyer River Beaver /du/, Doig Beaver /ʤu/)
*α, *ə → ə
*ʋ → ʊ
*V’ → V[high tone]
More retention of stem-final consonants than in Chipewyan ("some final affricates being retained as such")

Sekani

*ʦ → tθ (further → ʦ in some communities)
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*t → ʧ /_*i, *e, *u (in Fort Grahame Sekani and Fort McLeod Sekani, but not Ware Sekani)
*α → ɑ(?) (not enough data on Sekani for this to be certain)
*ʋ → o
*V’ → V[high tone]

Tahltan-Kaska-Tagish

*α → a
*ə → i or e
*ʋ → u
Stem-final consonants mostly preserved (but stem-final glottalization lost)
*V’ → V[low tone] (Tahltan and Tagish) or → V[high tone] (Kaska)

There are various developments of the obstruent series in various dialects (though the change *q → k is common to all of them):

Kaska:

*ʦ → tθ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ (however, the sound /x/ remains a (fronted) velar, "at least in some dialects")

Tagish:

*ʦ, *ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k > ʦʲ

Tahtlan:

*ʦ > ʦ
*ʧ, *ʧʷ, *k → ʧ (however, the sound /x/ remains a (fronted) velar, "at least in some dialects")

Tsetsaut

There is little good material on Tsetsaut, so not all the correspondences are clear.

*ʧ → ʦ
*ʧʷ → pf
*k → ʧ
*q → k
"Severe loss of stem-final consonants"
*α → ɑ(?) (not enough data on Tsetsaut for this to be certain)
*ʋ → o

Dakelh (K&G's "Carrier") and Babine

*ʦ, *ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ (Dakelh (and some dialects of Babine?)) or k (in Babine, or at least the Bulkley River dialect)
*q → k (Dakelh (and some dialects of Babine?)) or q (in Babine, or at least the Bulkley River dialect)
*e → i, e (Babine) or e (Dakelh)
*a → a, e (Babine) or a (Dakelh)
*u → o, u
*α, *ə → ə
*ʋ → ə (Babine) or u (Dakelh)
*V’ → V

Apparently the changes in the vowel system were brought about through "consonantal conditioning".

Chilcotin

*ʦ → ʦ̂ (a "flattening" [ʦ], which causes neighboring vowels to be articulated with a retracted tongue, e.g., Chilcotin /ʦ’i/ "canoe" = [ʦ’i], but /ʦ̂ʰi/ "stone" = [ʦʰəi] (presumably from PA *ʦʰe "stone", as given earlier))
*ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ (non-flattening)
*k → ʧ
*q → q (flattening) or k (nonflattening) (split under various conditions--in such a way that the sounds /k k’ qʰ χ ʁ/ are common, and /q q’ kʰ x/ are rare)
*e → i
*α, *ə → e or ɪ
*ʋ → ʊ
*V’ → V[high tone]

Sarcee

*ʦ, *ʧ, *ʧʷ → ʦ
*k → ʧ
*q → k
*e, *α, *ə → ɑ
*ʋ → u
*V’ → V[low tone] (but, V[high tone] → V[mid tone] if the vowel was unconstricted and historically "reduced" (rather than "full"))
Very conservative with stem-final consonants: affricates, glottalization ("at least before suffixes"), and some clusters retained

YES! FINALLY! DONE!
I better get some ZBBAward for this, people...

EDIT: Now up on the KQ!

[Radius Solis]

*s, *?, *??, *x (individual sounds, not series) ? s
*z, *?, *??, *? (individual sounds, not series) ? j
*? ? t?
*? ? t?
?j ? ?
*a ? u ([?])
*?j ? V[nasalized]j
*n, ?j ? nd ~ n? (if palatalized) /__V[non-nasal]
*? ? p
*?? ? p?
*?’ ? p’
*s ? f
*z ? v
*? ? k?
*?? ? k??
*?’ ? k?’
*s ? ?
*z ? w
*??, *??? ? s
*?? ? pf
*? ? ? (a "flattening" [?], which causes neighboring vowels to be articulated with a retracted tongue, e.g., Chilcotin /?’i/ "canoe" = [?’i], but /??i/ "stone" = [???i])

Holy crap, look at some of these. ts > p? wtf? z > w?

The enterprising conlanger can use the Athapaskan family to justify practically anything they want to do with their grammars... and it looks like this applies to sound changes too.

[Radius Solis]

STUPID UNICODE.

Since I can get the characters just fine by quoting the post, but they don't show up when I hit submit, I'm going to have to translate everything to SAMPA.

*s, *S, *S_w, *x s
*z, *Z, *Z_w, *G j
*ts tT
*ts tK
*j N
*a u
*Vj V[nasalized]j
*n, *j nd ~ ndZ (if palatalized) /__V[non-nasal]
*ts p
*ts_h p_h
*ts' p'
*s f
*z v
*ts k_w
*ts_h k_w_h
*ts' k'_w
*s W
*z w
*tS_h, *tS_w_h s
*tS_w pf
*ts ? a "flattening" [ts], which causes neighboring vowels to be articulated with a retracted tongue

[Whimemsz]

The tildes over the nasal sonorants don't seem to be displaying correctly for some people. So...I'll try to fix that as soon as I can.

[Cedh]

Holy crap, look at some of these. ts > p? wtf? z > w?

The enterprising conlanger can use the Athapaskan family to justify practically anything they want to do with their grammars... and it looks like this applies to sound changes too.

Slavey (dialect of Slavey-Hare)
*ʦ → tθ

Mountain (dialect of Slavey-Hare)
The dental series (*ʦ) changes to a labial one, with the changes (sounds now, not series!):
*ʦ → p
*ʦʰ → pʰ
*ʦ’ → p’
*s → f
*z → v

With these two compared, it looks like the ts > p change might have gone via ts > tT > t_N (linguolabial) > p, which doesn't sound too implausible to me... But there are indeed some crazy changes in there!

[Whimemsz]

Yes, I suspect the [tθ] series was an intermediate for the other Slavey-Hare and Dogrib dialects. I'm not sure if positing a linguolabial intermediate between that and the labials is necessary. In any case then the labial series in some dialects changed to labiovelar (the reverse change is much more common, but things like [p] > [kw] aren't unheard of).

[ EDIT: As it turns out, Krauss has elsewhere argued that that is indeed the path the shift went in. ]

*j N
*Vj V[nasalized]j
*n, *j nd ~ ndZ (if palatalized) /__V[non-nasal]

For all of those, "j" should be [j~], one of the nasalized sonorants. Maybe what I'll do is write the palatal or velar one as "ɲ" and the labial one as "m", so everyone can see them. But that means changes written like "ɲ → ŋ" or "m → m" will be somewhat misleading. It will also mean that when no change involving ɲ or m is written, it may be that the reflexes of the proto-sounds in that language aren't necessarily [ɲ] and [m], but something like [j~] and [w~].

Here's what I'll do. I'll put in parentheses after each instance of [w~] or [j~] "m" or "ɲ".