Post your conlang's phonology

[Buran]

Meant to be vaguely reminiscent of Chinese (aspirated vs. unaspirated, retroflex fricatives), Russian (dentals, trill, retroflex fricatives), or German (front rounded vowels).

Nasals: /m n/ <m n>
Stops: /p pʰ t tʰ k kʰ/ <b p d t g k>
Fricatives: /v s ʂ x/ <v s sh kh>
Affricates: /ts tsʰ tʂ tʂʰ/ <z c zh ch>
Approximants: /l j/ <l j>
Trill: /r/ <r>
Vowels: /i y u e e: ø o o: a a:/ <i y u e ee oe o oo a aa/

/n t tʰ s ts tsʰ l r/ are dental. Phonotactics are:

(C)(S)V(F/S)(P)

C = consonant, F = fricative, P = plosive, S = sonorant, and V = vowel.

There is pitch accent on the penultimate syllable.

[Buran]

...Did I accidentally kill this thread?

[2+3 clusivity]

...Did I accidentally kill this thread?

I'll bite. Here's the current version of my project:

mʱ m nʱ n ɳʱ ɳ
ʋʱ ʋ lʱ l ɭʱ ɭ yʱ y ɦ <h>
bʱ ~ β z ʒ gʱ ~ ɣ
b dʱ d ʣ ɖʐ ʤ g
pʰ ~ f p tʰ t ʦʰ ʦ ʈʂʰ ʈʂ ʧʰ ʧ kʰ ~ x k
s ʃ
rʱ r r̠ʱ r̠

i: ĩ: ɪ ʉ: ʉ̃: u: ũ: ʊ
e: ẽ: ø: ø̃: ə o: õ:
ɛ: œ:
a: ã: ɔ:

[Vuvuzela]

As usual, I'm going for systematicity more than intuitiveness.
/mʱ m nʱ n ɳʱ ɳ /<mh m nh n ñh ñ>
/ʋʱ ʋ lʱ l ɭʱ ɭ yʱ y ɦ/ <vh v lh l ḷh ḷ yh y h>
/bʱ ~ β z ʒ gʱ ~ ɣ/<bh zh jh gh>
/b dʱ d ʣ ɖʐ ʤ g/ <b d dh z ẓ j d g>
/pʰ ~ f p tʰ t ʦʰ ʦ ʈʂʰ ʈʂ ʧʰ ʧ kʰ ~ x k/<ph p th t ch c ċh ċ qh q kh k>
/s ʃ/<s x>
/rʱ r r̠ʱ r̠/<rh r ṛh ṛ>

/i: ĩ: ɪ ʉ: ʉ̃: u: ũ: ʊ/<ii in i üü ün uu un u>
/e: ẽ: ø: ø̃: ə o: õ:/<ee en öö ön a oo on>
/ɛ: œ:/<e ö>
/a: ã: ɔ:/<aa an o>

[Nortaneous]

oh i see i'm not the only one

(mh m nh n nrh nr vh v lh l lrh yh y h w z j gh b dh d dz dzr dr dj g f p th t ch c trh tr tjh tj x k s sh rh r rrh rr i iñ î ü üñ u uñ û e eñ ö öñ ê o oñ è ò a añ à)

[Hallow XIII]

...Did I accidentally kill this thread?

You did not. Oh, also comment: front rounded vowels are perfectly Chinese. So you aren't really adding the Germanic dimension there.

vuvuzela: man stop confusing this for the romanisation thread

[Buran]

You did not. Oh, also comment: front rounded vowels are perfectly Chinese. So you aren't really adding the Germanic dimension there.

...So they are. But the phonotactics are quite different from Chinese. By the way, what do you think of length contrast only on /e/, /o/, and /a/?

[Shemtov]

Here's the 3 Languages I am working on:
Anerite:
Consonants:
m n
p b t d tˤ k g q
pʰ tʰ tˤʰ kʰ qʰ
f s sˤ ʃ x ɣ ħ h
r
l
w j


Vowels:
a e i o u ə
No diphthongs are allowed.
When following tˤ, tˤʰ sˤ and q, e becomes ɛ, i becomes /ai\ and o and u become unrounded.
tˤʰ may be realized as the cluster /tˤħ\ by some speakers.

Phonotactics:
(C)V(C)(C)
if the coda has two consonants they will always be a sonorant or nasal followed by a stop.
Asperated and Pharyngealized sounds cannot occur as codas.


K'apfatweyatl:
m n <m n>
p t k <p t k>
t' k' <t' k'>
pf ts tʃ tɬ kx <pf ts tx tl kh>
ts' tʃ' tɬ' kx' <ts' tx' kl' kh'>
f f: s ʃ x x: <f ff s x h hh>
ɬ <l>
w j <w y>
l <ll>

Vowels
i u <i u>
e o <e o>
ɛ ɔ <ea oa>
a <a>

Allophony:
/k'/ may be pronounced as [q'] in stressed syllables.
/ʃ/, tʃ, and /tʃ'/ are pronounced as [ɕ] [tɕ] and [tɕ'] before front vowels.
An alternative analysis says that that [f:] and [x:] are allophones of /pf/ and /kx/ in final and intervocalic positions (unless both of the vowels are /a/).

Phonotactics:
CV(C),
Final consonants cannot be ejectives, [pf] or [kx].


An unamed Thai/MSEA language:

m n ɲ ŋ <m n nh ng>
p b t d k g <p b t d k g>
ɸ s ɕ x h <f s sh kh h>
tɕ <ch>
r <r>
β̞ ɻ j w <v r y w>
l <l>

Vowels:
i ɯ ə ɛ ʌ a <i u ea e o a>

Diphtongs:
ai <ai>
Tones (using [a] to represent the orthog):
˥ ˧ ˩ ˧˩ ˧˥ ˥˧˦ ˩˧˨ <ä a ā à á ǎ â>

Phonotactics:
(C)(C)V(C)
The second consonant can only be [r j w l]
The final-permitted consonants are [m n ŋ p t k ɻ j w]
[ɻ] can ONLY occur as a final- perhaps I'll make it the word final allophone of [r].

Example words:
èt- one
lya-Supreme G-d
püt- angel
nóm-food
ngang- eye
nhá -cat
krāi- king

[Nortaneous]

considered doing a descendant of V'eng but the inventory would be too boring so prob won't

/p b mb t d nd tʃ dʒ ndʒ k ŋg/
/s z ʃ ʒ x ɣ h/
/m n ɲ ŋ/
/w r j/
/a e o i u/ + length + syllabic ʒ ɣ

˥ ˧ ˨˩ ̰˩ ˧˥ (final glottal stop or vls fric or vls preinitial, default, final g or r or syllabic fricative, initial glottal stop, initial/final h) (mid and low tones merge for syllabic frics)

i˥ e˧ ʃa˥ u˧ ru˧ hĩ˥ ŋga˧. a̰˩ tẽ˧˥ u˧ oː˥ je˨˩, a̰˩ xi˧ re˥ e˧ si˧naː˨˩ a̰˩ siː˨˩siː˨˩ ɣa˧. tẽ˧˥ wẽ˧ dʒ̩˨˩ i˧˥ ʃa˧ wa̰˩ ri˨˩ i˧˥ ʃa˧ tʃṵ˩ ɲã˧ ri˨˩ ũ˧ na˧ ɲã˧ buː˨˩ ũ˧ ndi˧. a̰˩ wẽ˧ i˧˥ ʃa˧ o̰˩ dʒ̩˨˩ ru˧ i˧˥ ʃa˧ ru˧ e˧ ti˥ o̰˩ to˨˩ a˧ me˧ je˧je˧ dʒẽ˧ ri˥. o̰˩ kõ˧ ra̰˩ je˨˩ dʒ̩˨˩ ru˧ dʒ̩˨˩ to˨˩ si˧ ndi˧ tẽ˧˥ o˧.

Í e shá u ru hín nka. À těn u óh yê, à xi ré e sinâh â sîhsîh ga. Těn wen j ǐ sha wà rî ǐ sha chù nyan rî un na nyan bûh un ndi. À wen ǐ sha ò j ru ǐ sha ru e tí ò tô a me yeye jen rí. Ò kon rà yê j ru j tò si ndi těn o.

edit: i wonder what this would look like with tone letters. <t 0 g d s>
It e shat u ru hint nka. Ad tens u oht yeg, ad xi ret e sinahs ad sihgsihg ga. Tens wen j is sha wad rig is sha chud nyan rig is sha chud nyan buhs un ndi. Ad wen is sha od j ru is sha ru e tit od tog a me yeye...no

[äreo]

Msérsca:

/p b t d k/
/f s x/
/m n/
/r l j w/
/a ɛ i o y s̩ m̩ n̩/
/aː iː oː ʉː ʌo̯/

syllables are (c(c))(v)(c(c))
nasal + stop, nasal + fricative, /f s/ + stop, fricative + nasal, /tf df kf ps bs ts ds ks px tx/, /k/ + other stop, stop + /r l/, and fricative + /r l/ are allowed onsets, as are any of those clusters + /j/
/mp mps nt nk nks sp st sk ps ts ks ms ns rs rt ls lt tx kt/ are possible codas
/j w/ are not allowed in codas

/pj bj tj dj kj fj sj hj mj nj/ are [pç bʝ tʃ dʒ c fç ʃ ç mɲ ɲ]
/rj lj/ are [ʒ ʎ] at the onset of a syllable
/p b t d k f s x m n r l/ are [pʲ bʲ tʲ dʲ kʲ fʲ sʲ ç mʲ ɲ rʲ ʎ] before /i/
/ktj kdj/ are [ks gz]
/r/ is [ɾ] intervocalically and finally
/b d/ lenite intervocalically to [v ð]; palatalization before /i/ still applies
/ji jiː wy wʉː/ do not occur beyond loanwords
/px tx/ are [ʍ θ]
/mx nx/ are [w ð]
unvoiced consonants in /mf nf ms ns fb fd sb sd df bs ds kb kd/ assimilate to voiced

/i o ʏ/ do not occur in stressed open syllables
/s̩ m̩ n̩/ only occur in monosyllables or after a consonant, i.e. they do not begin multisyllabic words
/a/ is [a] in closed syllables, [ɔ] everywhere else
/i o y/ are [ɪ ɔ ʏ] in closed syllables, in unstressed open syllables
stress is usually on the first syllable; in words with long vowels, the first long vowel is usually stressed, e.g. sama [ˈsɔmɔ] water but samá [sɔˈmoː] expanse; something like [sɔˈmɔ] is possible, but unlikely
the first consonant in a cluster after a stressed vowel in a multisyllabic word will typically be parsed as a coda, e.g. mosca [ˈmɔs.kɔ] scholar but moscí [muˈskʲiː] fish

[CatDoom]

Ddiktas Ddammay is my first attempt at a conlang. It's pretty heavily inspired by native Californian languages, but I wanted to be able to pronounce it without too much work, so I based the phonology mostly on Austronesian languages, particularly Malagasy.

Consonants:

Nasal: /m n ŋ/
Plosive: /t k g/
Fricative: /f v s z h/
Affricate: /ts/
Approximant: /j w l/
Tap: /ɾ/

Vowels: /a i u/

Syllables have the canonical form CV(C). /h/ is not allowed as a coda, and /m n ŋ/, /t/, and /ts/ never appear in word-final position.

When the fricatives /f v s z h/ and the alveolar tap /ɾ/ follow other fricatives, nasal sonorants (/m n ŋ/), or liquids (/l ɾ/), they are realized as the allophones /p b ts dz k/ and /d/, respectively.

[Nortaneous]

Plosive: /t k g/

????

[Bristel]

Plosive: /t k g/

????

What. I see a p-less language, with the only voicing distinction in the velars. Is it a problem?

[CatDoom]

Plosive: /t k g/

????

Yeah, so...

/d/ and /ɾ/ are allophones, and in the history of the language /d/ has mostly merged to /ɾ/ except in (some) medial clusters.

Likewise, the language does have the bilabial plosives /p/ and /b/, but they've undergone linition to /f/ and /v/ in most positions.

Should I instead mark /p b d/ as the primary phones, even though they appear in fewer positions than the allophones /f v ɾ/ ?

[Nortaneous]

been fucking with the idea of doing a conlang for actual everyday use, like areo's msersca. probably not gonna do it but if i did here's what it'd look like

/p b t d tʃ dʒ k g/
/m n (ɲ ŋ?)/
/f v s z (ʃ?) h/
/ɺ j (w?)/
/a e o i ɨ u/, of which the frequencies would probably go a > ɨ > e o > i > u, i can tell that much already
CV(s n)

shit, this could be hathic, i might do it

Should I instead mark /p b d/ as the primary phones, even though they appear in fewer positions than the allophones /f v ɾ/ ?

yes, definitely, /p b t d k g/ is a completely normal plosive inventory, whereas /t k g/ just wouldn't happen

[CatDoom]

I'll definitely consider it, though I will point out that, according to WALS, Seneca has only the plosives /b t k/, and according to Wikipedia at least some of the other Iroquoian languages (including Mohawk) have no labial consonants at all.

[Hallow XIII]

the point is that you would want /t d k g/ at least

/t k g/ is impossible by all standards

[2+3 clusivity]

according to WALS, Seneca has only the plosives /b t k/, and according to Wikipedia . . .

Please be careful with your sources.

WALS only says that Seneca has a voicing gap of "other" in its section on stop series. http://wals.info/datapoint/4A/wals_code_snc. Wikipedia, which you also cite, cites the same source as WALS and gives a fairly different stop phoneme inventory from yours (/t k ʔ/). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_language. Wikipedia's inventory also lines up with the Handbook of North American Indians: Languages on p. 553.

. . . at least some of the other Iroquoian languages (including Mohawk) have no labial consonants at all.

Yes, missing one place of articulation in a stop series is not unheard of.

the point is that you would want /t d k g/ at least

/t k g/ is impossible by all standards

I believe Inversion is correct. If you are going to have a gap in your stop places of articulation (i.e. labial, dental, etc. missing), that gap is very unlikely to be filled in by a non-modal voiced stop at that place of articulation when none of your other places of articulation fill that voicing slot. I.e. /b t d k g/ works where, for example, /p d k/ probably doesn't.

[CatDoom]

I'm still not sure that there's not some kind of miscommunication here. A rough summary of the phonetics of Riktas (whose Latin orthography is still a bit in flux >_>) would be as follows:

Nasal: /m n ŋ/
Plosive: /p b t d k g/
Fricative: /f v s z h/
Affricate: /ts dz/
Approximant: /j w l/
Tap: /ɾ/

Vowels: /a i u/

There are almost certainly other sounds involved in the spoken language as well, especially considering that I'm the only (far-from-fluent) speaker, and I mainly speak English, so at the very least I'm probably aspirating my plosives all over the place and so forth.

The list I gave before was intended to be a phonemic inventory; in Riktas /p b d dz/ are in complementary distribution with /f v ɾ z/, and they alternate in a very predictable fashion under particular conditions. Under those same conditions, /ts k/ alternate with /s h/, but k and ts occur under other conditions as well, and are therefore (as far as I understand it) not in complementary distribution with h and s, so I listed them as seprate phomemes.

With regard to Seneca, I didn't actually look at the wikipedia page or the WALS page for the language. I got /b t k/ from Chapter 5, where Ian Maddieson writes "it [a posive system categorized as "other"] may have partial sets of voiced and voiceless plosives, as in Seneca (Iroquoian; New York State), which has only three of the six plosives under discussion, namely /t, k, b/." I'm guessing that's some kind of mistake, and that somewhere "b" got substituted for "ʔ". Moral of the story: double check your sources.

[2+3 clusivity]

With regard to Seneca, I didn't actually look at the wikipedia page or the WALS page for the language. I got /b t k/ from Chapter 5, where Ian Maddieson writes "it [a posive system categorized as "other"] may have partial sets of voiced and voiceless plosives, as in Seneca (Iroquoian; New York State), which has only three of the six plosives under discussion, namely /t, k, b/"

Huh, so it does.


*EDIT

I'm guessing that's some kind of mistake, and that somewhere "b" got substituted for "ʔ". Moral of the story: double check your sources.

I was thinking that too . . . still it seems he's talking about the set /p, t, k, b, d, g/.

[CatDoom]

Yeah, it's clearly not just a typo... not sure what happened there.

[finlay]

If you have multiple points of articulation and no voicing contrast on any one poa, viz. /b t k/, /p d k/, these would be simplified to /p t k/ for the purposes of cross-linguistic comparison. Some Australian languages are transcribed as having only voiced plosives, but this is kind of a misnomer because if you say it without voicing that's still the same phoneme, and they also have fricative realizations under certain conditions. Basically for phonemes and typology and realism it is what distinctions you make that is important. Phonemicizations also tend to (arbitrarily) prioritize plosives and voiceless sounds so yeah if you have phonemes that can also be plosives it's usual to write them like that.

I think you should do as you like for your conlang, anyway. Just bear in mind that /t k g/ is typologically unheard of.

[CatDoom]

Thanks for the advice! I'm still pretty new to all this stuff, and what's the point of joining a forum like this if people don't point out when I'm being dumb?

[Bristel]

A new phonology, which is a terrible rip off of something (mostly, sorta). Guess what it is!

Consonants:
/p t k tɕ tʃ/ <p t k ć č>
/m n ɲ ŋ/ <m n ñ ŋ>
/s ɕ ʃ x/ <s ś š x>
/ɸ ð ðʲ/ <f d đ>
/l ʎ r/ <l ł r>
/w j/ <w y>

Vowels:

Code: Select all

i /i/	ü /y/	ï /ɯ/	u /u/
e /e/			          o /o/
ä /æ/			          a /ɒ/

Allophony:

/p t k/ > in morphology triggered consonant gradation.
[pː tː kː] in gradation(?) and/or plurals of root words with word-medial stops(?).

Phonotactics:
VC
CV(C) usually
CVC(ː)V -- geminated stops can only occur word medially.

Stress:

Stress is always on the first syllable. (Is this called acrostatic, or is that just a term when there are more than a few types of stress on a word?)

Vowel harmony:

(not sure how to do vowel harmony with this vowel compliment)

Example text:

Ćïngüšitingïpiđućï šäpüdi pü lixü tüđi püđüpïm. (without vowel harmony changes)

EDIT: Added a /r/ that I forgot. And allophony of stops.

[gach]

A new phonology, which is a terrible rip off of something (mostly, sorta). Guess what it is!

Oh you. You even got the guts to include /ðʲ/.

Vowel harmony:

(not sure how to do vowel harmony with this vowel compliment)

That shouldn't be too hard. There are the natural pairs a~ä u~ü and ï~i. The remaining vowels e and o could be either neutral or determine the vowel harmony class of the word uniquely. Based on your example they are already rare, so whatever you choose to do shouldn't be much of a problem. You could also go for some labial harmony, but that would make the system quite a bit more complicated with these vowels.