Post your conlang's phonology

[CatDoom]

Actually, Wikipedia represents the tones of Usila Chinantec like so:



I'm not sure of their exact source, but the article seems to be pretty well referenced.

That being said, it seems that at least some of these tone systems are subject to differing analyses. For instance, Nort describes Black Miao (Hmu) as having five level tones, but Wikipedia describes three Hmu dialects, all of which seem to have three or (allophonically) four level tones.

[Cúlro]

This describes contour tones on monosyllables in Usila Chinantec- at least 31 and 34.
This source also says that in apparent 5 level tone systems, some of the level tones always have contour realisations, as in Gaoba Dong. It mentions Trique specifically its two highest 'level' tones actually rise in pitch (the Thai high pitch actually has a dipping contour, too).

It seems that a system with 5 actually level 'level' tones isn't even unequivocally attested, let alone 5 level tones without contours to contrast with.

[----]

Also, I perhaps worded it poorly, but I meant no natlang distinguishes *just* this many level tones - no contours. Gaoba Dong has 3 rising contours and a falling contour as well as those level tones, and Usila Chinantec has contours too.

Oh! well sure, yeah, that's a fair claim. Do any languages even have a system of *four* level tones and no others?

[cromulant]

While we're on the topic of tone romanization, here's the Kuty way:

High (4): á
High Rising (34): a̋
High Falling (43): â
Low (2): à
Low Rising (12): ǎ
Low Falling (21): ȁ

Any objections?

Your rising and falling tones - wouldn't it be more intuitive to use â ǎ for the two falling tones and a̋ ȁ for the two rising tones? Then diacritic shape (v vs //) would distinguish contour (rise vs fall) and diacritic direction would distinguish pitch. It just seems counterintuitive to me to have the low rising diacritic be a flipped over version of the high falling instead of the high rising.
I think I see your reasoning though - each diacritic has a / or \ at its left side to distinguish if it's a high or low tone, and then the right hand side / or \ or nothing symbolises the contour shape. That's quite systematical and logical and a good way of doing it - the diacritic shape even mirrors the tone names. It just struck me that having v or ^ for falling and // or \\ for rising tones, with the direction they point distinguishing high or low would be more intuitive. But I guess what's intuitive is different for different people and both work fine.

I've decided to do it the way you suggested. Since the rising and level tones merge in unstressed syllables, it is apt that they should have similar shapes, while the always-distinct falling tones look different.

[Nortaneous]

hm

/p b t d ʈ ɖ k g/ <p b t d tr dr k g>
/ts dz tʂ tɕ dʑ/ <c dz cr ch j>
/s z ʂ ʐ (ɕ ʑ) h/ <s z sh r (sh z) h>
/m n ɲ ŋ/ <m n ñ ng>
/j w/ <y w/
/a e o ɨ/ <a e o i> (jɨ wɨ , Pɨ , (t)ɕɨ (d)ʑɨ )

[TaylorS]

A re-booted future English phoneme inventory:

Plosives: /p pʰ t tʰ t͡ʃ t͡ʃʰ k kʰ/
Nasals: /m m̥ n n̥ ŋ/
Fricatives: /f v s z ʃ ʒ x h/
Liquids: /r ʁ j w/

Short vowels: /a ɛ e i y o ɔ u/
Long vowels: /aː eː iː oː uː/

Yep, no /l/. modern English /w/ shifted to /v/ and then /l/ shifted to /w/.

/y/ is from AmE /u:/ and /ʊ/. /u/ and /u:/ is from /oɪ/ and /u:l/

/r/ is from AmE /θɹ/ and /ɾɚ/.

AmE /ɹ/ became /x/.

Aping Futurese, I have vowel breaking followed by a merger of the syllable-final lenis and fortis plosives, though the details are significantly different.

The voiceless nasals are from /sm mp/ and /sn nt/



An example sentence:

"John went to the store to buy a jug of milk."
Jan hivènh ta dè sdòr ta bè jaòkh a'mèwkh.
[t͡ʃan ˈçivɛn̥ tʰədɛˈstɔʁ tʰəˈbɛ ˈd͡ʒaɔx əˈmɛwx]

[----]

The voiceless nasals are from /sm mp/ and /sn nt/

what happened to /nk/?

[Nortaneous]

another future english

/pʰ p tʰ t tsʰ ts tʃʰ tʃ kʰ k ʔ/
/f v s z ʃ ʒ ʂ ɻ ɣ h/
/m n ŋ l j w/
/æ ɑ e ø ʌ o i y ɯ u æi ʌi ɯi/ + length, nasality

[احمکي ارش-ھجن]

Final Yaškik Yat-Vṛḵaẕikam phonology
Nasal: /m n ʰn/<m n hn>
Stops: /p b t d k g q ʔ/<p b t d k g q ʾ>
Pre-aspirated Stops: /ʰp ʰt ʰk ʰq ʰʔ/<hp ht hk hq hʾ>
Uvularized Stops: /pʶ bʶ tʶ dʶ/<ṗ ḅ ṭ ḍ>
Affricates: /ts tɕ dʑ/<ḏ č j>
Fricative: /ɸ β s z ɕ ʑ x ɣ χ h/<f v s z š ẕ ḵ ǧ ḫ h>
Laterals: /l ɬ/<l ḻ>
Rhotic: /ɹ~ɾ r ʀ/<r rr ṟ>

[TaylorS]

The voiceless nasals are from /sm mp/ and /sn nt/

what happened to /nk/?

WHOOPS, I knew I was forgetting something!

[baklvon]

The phonology of my first conlang: Loese? World and language still under construction.

stops /t d k g/ <t d k g>
fricatives /v ts z ʃ ȝ x/ <v tz z q zh x>
nasals /m n ñ ŋ/ <m n ñ ng>
liquids /l r/ <l r>
glides /w j/ <w j>

syllabic consonants /l r w j/ <l r w j>

vowels /ɪ ɛ æ u o a/ <i he ae u o a>
nasal vowels /ɪ ɛ/ <ii e>
rounded vowels /u o/ <ü ö>

Now I know that much of this is not kosher in terms of the IPA and whatnot... I'm admittedly a bit limited by my incomplete knowledge of linguistics (being a new college student studying the field), as well as by my near-complete (but improving) Unicode illiteracy.

Anyhow, I hope you can see what I mean here, and constructive criticism would be much appreciated.

[CatDoom]

Welcome to the boards! I think I get most of your notation, though your reference to "rounded vowels" makes me wonder if the vowels written <u> and <o> are unrounded (i.e. /ɯ/ and /ɤ/). One utility I use a lot (including just now, to get the IPA symbols for back unrounded vowels) is this handy IPA 'keyboard'.

As for the phonology itself, it looks mostly fine to me. It's unusual not to have any labial stops, but I'm assuming you know that. One concern I do see is that you seem to be contrasting syllabic /j/ and /w/ with the vowels /i/ and /u/. I'm not saying that's necessarily impossible, but /j/ and /w/ are usually really close to being non-syllabic [i̯] and [u̯], so it's a pretty fine distinction to make.

If the language does have a contrast between rounded and unrounded back vowels, it might be interesting to have a non-labialized velar approximant /ɰ/ in addition to (or possibly instead of) /w/. It might fit in with the general shortage of labials and could also help explain into that gap you've got in your voiced fricative series. Not that you really need an excuse to not have a voiced velar fricative; it's just a thought.

[ThisIsNotAUsername]

I have just begun developing a conlang - a tongue spoken by a people reminiscent of Minoans, but living on plains and rivers instead of the sea, that gave birth to the first real civilization on their world. Its phonology and grammar is based on Etruscan and Japanese, sometimes very loosely, but its vocabulary is entirely original; in fact, I've been using a random vocabulary generator, picking the words that I thought sounded decent and tweaking them.

Vowels
Close i (I i) ʉ (Ǔ ǔ) u (U u)
Mid e (E e) ɘ (Ě ě)
Open a (A a) ɶ (Ǎ ǎ)

Consonants
Nasal m (M m) n (N n) ɲ (Ň ň)
Plosive p (P p) d (D d) k (K k)
Fricative v (V v) θ (Þ þ) z (Z z) ʃ (Ž ž) h (H h)
Approximant ɹ (Ř ř)
Trill r (R r)
Lateral approximant l (L l)

In this language, there are only two kinds of syllables: CV and CVC; two adjacent syllables can't start with the same consonant and can't have the same vocal, and a CVC syllable can't have two identical consonants.

[Chagen]

Two naming langs for a fantasy novel. Not going to mention the names, I'm paranoid about plagiarism (yes that's acting a little haughty but you gotta be careful; I'm gonna actually publish this thing). The first:

/m n ŋ/
<m n ŋ>

/p b t d k g q/
<p b t d k g q>

/s z θ ð x ɣ~ʀ ħ ʕ/
<s z ṭ ḍ x h ħ ḥ>

/tʃ dʒ/
<c j>

/j w r~ɹ/
<y w r>

/a i u a: i: u:/
<a i u ā/aa ī/ii ū/uu>

/r/ is [ɹ] after a guttural consonant.

Syllable structure is (C)V(C)(C), I haven't elaborated further.

This is the language of the heroine's country. I intentionally gave her country a rather guttural language as a twist on the "only villains can have 'ugly' languages" cliche.

Now, the other one:

/m n/
<m n>
/p b t d k g/
<p b t d c g>

/s f x h/
<s f j h>

/a i e o u a: i: e: o: u:/
<a i e o u ā ī ē ō ū>

/i u/ are [j w] before vowels. <c> is always "hard".

Phonotactics are undecided but expect some Latin-like stuff of (s)(C)(C)V(C)(C). This is the language of the villains' country. It's vocalic and "beautiful", one again as part of turning the aforementioned cliche on its head.

I probably will have to end up altering the orthography of the first language since the vast majority of English speakers are retarded and will bitch about the diacritics.

[s]I can't wait till readers mangle the pronunciations half to death[/s]

[baklvon]

Welcome to the boards! I think I get most of your notation, though your reference to "rounded vowels" makes me wonder if the vowels written <u> and <o> are unrounded (i.e. /ɯ/ and /ɤ/). One utility I use a lot (including just now, to get the IPA symbols for back unrounded vowels) is this handy IPA 'keyboard'.

As for the phonology itself, it looks mostly fine to me. It's unusual not to have any labial stops, but I'm assuming you know that. One concern I do see is that you seem to be contrasting syllabic /j/ and /w/ with the vowels /i/ and /u/. I'm not saying that's necessarily impossible, but /j/ and /w/ are usually really close to being non-syllabic [i̯] and [u̯], so it's a pretty fine distinction to make.

If the language does have a contrast between rounded and unrounded back vowels, it might be interesting to have a non-labialized velar approximant /ɰ/ in addition to (or possibly instead of) /w/. It might fit in with the general shortage of labials and could also help explain into that gap you've got in your voiced fricative series. Not that you really need an excuse to not have a voiced velar fricative; it's just a thought.

stops /t d k g/ <t d k g>
fricatives /v ts z ʃ ȝ x/ <v tz z q zh x>
nasals /m n ñ ŋ/ <m n ñ ng>
liquids /l r/ <l r>
approximants /w j/ <w j>

syllabic consonants /l r w j/ <l r w j>

vowels /ɪ ɛ æ u o a/ <i he ae u o a>
nasal vowels /ɪ ɛ/ <ii e>
unrounded vowels /ɯ ɤ/ <ü ö>

Made a few categorical changes that I was lazy with. Does that clear it up a bit?

[2+3 clusivity]

A consonant inventory I have been toying with:

m(b)ʙ m:(b)ʙ n(d)r n:(d)r ɳ(ɖ)ɽ
ʙ ʙ: r r: ɽ
m m: n n: ɲ h̃ h̃:
ʋ ʋ: l j
mb m:b nd n:d ɳɖ
p p: t t: ʈ k
d

The ":" series is strong as in NEC and Ocaina; in addition to greater "strength," the series is also resistant to intervocalic voicing and frication. The pre-nasalized series could probably be reanalyzed as clusters, but I have I have kept them as phonemes as they are acceptable onsets even word initially.

. . . the non-nasal approximants are also subject to left to right nasal concord with nasal approximants. Unvoiced stops and simple and complex trills serve as blockers.

[Pogostick Man]

What are the vowels like? Is it a small, NWC-type system?

[finlay]

stops /t d k g/ <t d k g>
fricatives /v ts z ʃ ȝ x/ <v tz z q zh x>
nasals /m n ñ ŋ/ <m n ñ ng>
liquids /l r/ <l r>
approximants /w j/ <w j>

syllabic consonants /l r w j/ <l r w j>

vowels /ɪ ɛ æ u o a/ <i he ae u o a>
nasal vowels /ɪ ɛ/ <ii e>
unrounded vowels /ɯ ɤ/ <ü ö>

Made a few categorical changes that I was lazy with. Does that clear it up a bit?

unrounded vowels don't form a separate category from regular vowels. also be careful to put the nasal symbol on the nasal vowels otherwise it's unclear.

i would write it like:
vowels /ɪ ɛ æ ɯ u ɤ o a/ <i he ae ü u ö o a>
nasal vowels /ɪ̃ ɛ̃/ <ii e>

that said, there are some odd orthographical choices, particularly <he>, and the fact that there's no consistent way to distinguish nasal and regular vowels (i would write the nasal vowels ĩ and ẽ or in and en), and the fact that ü and ö would usually be interpreted as rounded front vowels rather than unrounded back vowels. that's not to say you can't use them that way, just that personally i think you'd be better off using a different diacritic.

ɯ is usually written ı (eg Turkish), ư (eg Vietnamese), or eu (eg Korean romanization). ɤ isn't a very common vowel – it's written e in Mandarin romanization and eo in Korean romanization, but o, ö, oe are also found. Vietnamese also has ơ, which I presume is originally ɤ but is now a long schwa (because those sounds aren't very distinct). So you could have <ư ơ> for /ɯ ɤ/. Another option is to write /ɯ ɤ/ as <u o> and /u o/ with diacritics eg <û ô> or whatever.

[Nortaneous]

ȝ is yogh. it's not used in IPA. the letter you're looking for is ʒ. ñ also isn't used in IPA -- it uses ɲ -- but no one cares about that.

/ts/ isn't a fricative. it's an affricate. and having /z ʃ ʒ/ without /s/ is weird.

i don't think there are any languages in the real world that use <q> as a fricative.

[----]

i don't think there are any languages in the real world that use <q> as a fricative.

A couple varieties of Quechua do, but that's not *really* a productive counterexample because it's just PQ *q > /X/ (or /R/) unconditionally.

[8Deer]

i don't think there are any languages in the real world that use <q> as a fricative.

Mikmaq uses it for /x/.

[Nortaneous]

that has basque loanwords so it's not a real language. owned

[2+3 clusivity]

What are the vowels like? Is it a small, NWC-type system?

No. The language has a set of primarily "half-long" vowels (shown here as ":") and a set of three reduced super-short vowels.

i: i̤: ĩ: ĩ̤: ʉ: ʉ̤: ʉ̃: ʉ̤̃: u: ṳ: ũ: ṳ̃:
ɪ ə ʊ
e: e̤: ẽ: ẽ̤: o: o̤: õ: õ̤:
ɛ: ɛ̤: a: a̤: ã: ã̤: ɔ: ɔ̤:

Further, the half-long series can take contrastive nasalization and breathy voicing. The breathy voiced vowels are also contrastive with series of initials ending in /h̃/ or /h̃:/ and plain voiced vowels.

[finlay]

It might be easier to write those without a length mark and then use ɪ̆ ʊ̆ ə̆ for the extra short vowels. Conservation of detail and all that. Since you've described in words how they're pronounced, the symbol you use becomes arbitrary.

[txmmj]

One I'm hoping to start working with more soon. Let me know if anyone has any suggestions.

Consonants

/p b t d k ɡ q ɢ ʔ/ - p b t d c g c g x
/ts tʃ/ - ç ḉ
/m n ŋ ɴ/ - m n ng ng
/r/ - r
/f θ s ʃ x χ h/ - f z s ś k k h
/ɮ/ - l
/ʋ j/ - v j

* /p t k q/ are realized as [p̚ t̚ k̚ q̚] word finally
* /b d g ɢ/ are realized as [β ð ɣ ʁ] after a vowel and before another vowel, a sibilant, or a liquid
* /k ɡ ŋ x/ and /q ɢ ɴ χ/ are in complementary distribution with the former occurring in a syllable containing front vowels and the latter occurring in a syllable containing back vowels
* /hm hn hŋ hɴ hr hɮ/ are realized as [m̥ n̥ ŋ̥ ɴ̥ r̥ ɬ]
* /r ɮ/ are realized as [r̥ ɬ] word finally
* long consonants are represented by doubling the consonant (ng --> nng)

Vowels

/i y u/ - i y u
/e ø o/ - e ø o
/a/ - a

* when unstressed, vowels are slightly raised
* long vowels are represented by doubling the vowel

Vowel Harmony

Front: e y ø
Back: a u o
Neutral: i

Stress

Stress falls primarily on the first syllable of a word. Syllables with irregular stress are marked with an acute accent.