The Correspondence Library

The best topics from Languages & Linguistics, kept on a permanent basis.
Shane Henry
Niš
Niš
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:28 am

Appalachian English

Post by 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?

User avatar
masako
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 4:31 pm
Location: 가매
Contact:

Re: Appalachian English

Post by masako »

Shane Henry wrote:Won't someone please compile all these sound change tables on a website?
I thought this was a website?

User avatar
Tengado
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:12 am
Location: Shenyang, China

Re: Appalachian English

Post by Tengado »

Khang wrote:
Shane Henry wrote:Won't someone please compile all these sound change tables on a website?
I thought this was a website?
Heh Heh :P I think he was emphasising the compile - currently you have to trawl through 11 pages to see if the ones you want are here.
- "But this can be stopped."
- "No, I came all this way to show you this because nothing can be done. Because I like the way your pupils dilate in the presence of total planetary Armageddon.
Yes, it can be stopped."

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Post by 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.

User avatar
Lleu
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:38 am
Location: Tkaronto

Post by Lleu »

Whimemsz wrote: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.
agus tha mo chluasan eòlach air a’ mhac-talla fhathast / às dèidh dhomh dùsgadh
(mona nicleòid wagner, “fo shneachd”)

jmcd
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1034
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:46 am
Location: Réunion
Contact:

Post by jmcd »

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

User avatar
johanpeturdam
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:32 pm
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia, originally: Funningur, Faroe Islands
Contact:

Post by 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?
Ungur nemur, gamal fremur
Da giovani si impara, da adulti si applica

User avatar
Rui
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Beiʒing 拆那

Post by 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 :)

User avatar
Yaali Annar
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 10:25 am

Post by 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.
Image

User avatar
Dewrad
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:02 pm

Post by 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?
Some useful Dravian links: Grammar - Lexicon - Ask a Dravian
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)

User avatar
pharazon
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 1:51 am
Location: Ann Arbor
Contact:

Post by pharazon »

Dewrad wrote: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.

User avatar
LoneWolf
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:41 pm
Location: Somewhere in the North

Post by LoneWolf »

Anyone got sound changes for Q-Celtic to Old Irish? I would very much appreciate.
"Brothers will battle to bloody end,
and sisters' sons their sib betray;
woe's in the world, much wantonness;
axe-age, sword-age, cloven shields,
wind-age, wolf-age, ere the world crumbles;
will the spear of no man spare the other."
-->Voluspa

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Post by Whimemsz »

Dewrad wrote: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
Niš
Niš
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:15 pm
Location: Leksand, Sweden

Post by saffecool »

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

4pq1injbok
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:37 pm

Post by 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?

User avatar
brandrinn
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:59 pm
Location: Seoul
Contact:

Post by 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/)
[quote="Nortaneous"]Is South Africa better off now than it was a few decades ago?[/quote]

User avatar
Soap
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: Scattered disc
Contact:

Post by 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?
Last edited by Soap on Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Re: Proto-Athapascan to various Athapascan languages?

Post by Whimemsz »

Petusek wrote:
Radius Solis wrote: 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
Niš
Niš
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:04 pm
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Proto-Athapascan to various Athapascan languages?

Post by Petusek »

Whimemsz wrote:
Petusek wrote:
Radius Solis wrote: 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

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Post by 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’, , *l
3) Dental affricates/fricatives : , *ʦʰ, *ʦ’, *s, *z
4) Palatal : , *ʧʰ, *ʧ’, ,
5) Labialized palatal : *ʧʷ, *ʧʷʰ, *ʧ’ʷ, *ʃʷ, *ʒʷ
6) (Front) velar : *k, *kʰ, *k’, *x,
7) Uvular : *q, *qʰ, *q’, ,
8) Labialized uvular : *qʷ, *qʷʰ, *q’ʷ, *χʷ, *ʁʷ
9) Glottal : , *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)
4)
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?): , tθʰ, tθ’, θ, ð. This series is abbreviated with . Additionally, in a few languages there is a retroflex(?) series, abbreviated with .

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 , , and ).

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 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 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!
Last edited by Whimemsz on Sat Jun 09, 2007 9:30 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Radius Solis
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:40 pm
Location: Si'ahl
Contact:

Post by Radius Solis »

Whimemsz wrote: *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.

User avatar
Radius Solis
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:40 pm
Location: Si'ahl
Contact:

Post by 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

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Post by 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
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Post by Cedh »

Radius Solis wrote: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.
Whimemsz wrote: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!

User avatar
Whimemsz
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 690
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing

Post by 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. ]
Radius Solis wrote:*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".
Last edited by Whimemsz on Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply