Post your conlang's phonology

[Whimemsz]

I see the Arapaho influence! Actually closer to Gros Ventre, really.

What about phonotactics etc. etc.?

[roninbodhisattva]

I see the Arapaho influence! Actually closer to Gros Ventre, really.

What about phonotactics etc. etc.?

Basically C(C)V(C) syllables with optional initials at the left edge of a word and a limited number of finals. The possible medial clusters would be:

n3 ns ŋx hC xC sb st sk s3 sx

Don't know about coda at the left edge of the word, it would probably be a little bigger. Potentially also including a limited set of initial clusters, with the palatalized segments being reanalyzed as a /Cj/ sequence and adding velars followed by /w/. The /Cj/ would be able to occur with any consonant. Also three fricative + /n/ clusters: 3n sn xn.

Alternatively, I might just keep the palatalized consonants like they are. I do like them that way.

[el flokratisson]

Flokrati phonology:

a [a] open front unrounded vowel
â [æ] near-open front unrounded vowel
e [ə] schwa
i close front unrounded vowel
o [ɔ] open-mid back rounded vowel
ô [œ] open-mid front rounded vowel
ô [o] (as word ending) close-mid back rounded vowel
û [y] close front rounded vowel

b [ b ] voiced bilabial plosive
ƀ [bv] voiced labiodental affricate
c [k] voiceless velar plosive
cj [t͡ʃ] voiceless palato-alveolar affricate
d [d] voiced alveolar plosive
dh [θ] voiceless dental non-sibilant fricative
f [f] voiceless labiodental fricative
g [ɡ] (before every vocal except e and i) voiced velar plosive
g [χ] (before e and i) voiceless uvular fricative
j [ʒ] voiced palato-alveolar fricative
l [l] alveolar lateral approximant
m [m] bilabial nasal
n [n] alveolar nasal
r [ɾ] alveolar flap
ɽ [ɹ] alveolar approximant
s [s] voiceless alveolar sibilant
sj [ʃ] voiceless palato-alveolar fricative
t [t] voiceless alveolar plosive
v [v] voiced labiodental fricative
y [j] palatal approximant

[roninbodhisattva]

This is something I came up with today through a couple classes that I couldn't focus in. It's supposed to be vaguely Meso-American/Zapotecan. The consonant inventory is:

Code: Select all

p      t                k      kʷ     ʔ
b      d                g      gʷ
       s     ʂ     ʃ    x             h
       z     ʐ     ʒ
m      n           ɲ    ŋ
       l     r     y           w       

There is a length in vowels, along with a distinction between glottalized (= final glottal stop, medial in long vowels). There are also several vowel clusters which behave as long vowels.

Code: Select all

i   ɨ   u        i:                ia   ɨa   ua      ie      uo
e       o        e:       o:       oa        ea        
    a                 a:

The syllable structure is (C)C(C)V(V)(ʔ)(C), where VV stands for a long vowel or cluster and ʔ for glottalization on the nucleus vowel. Final consonants are limited to /n w j r b/ or a voiceless sibilant. Final /n/ drops with nasalization of the preceding vowel. The initial consonant clusters are composed maximally of three consonants. Basic two term consonant clusters are made up of two obstruents sharing voicing. Any single consonant or two C cluster may be preceded by one of three pre-initial consonants: /n w r/. Alternatively, any resonant /m n ɲ ŋ l r w j/ can appear in the initial geminate (i.e. /m:i/). The initial consonant clusters is my favorite thing about this phonology.

There is also contrastive tone on non-glottalized syllables, either low or high. This is probably just lexical. It's also probably just a properties of roots, or given melodies are. I may just make glottalization part of the tone system since it's in complementary distribution with tone on syllables. I have to work this out better.

[MONOBA]

In case you missed it, Siwa Phonology: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7216892/fororogy.pdf

[2+3 clusivity]

***moved***

[Chagen]

A Ngith phonology, completely bullshitted on the spot:

Stops:
/p b t d k g q ɢ ʔ/

Fricatives:
/f s h/

Ejectives:
/m' n' p' t' k' q'/

Nasals:
/m n ɲ ŋ/

Approx/Misc.:
/j w ʁ/

Vowels:
/e a o/

Vowels can be phonemically nasalized, lengthened, and rhotacized.

The unvoiced-voiced stop phonemes are never actually realized as such. The "voiced" phonemes are actually glottalized in real speech.

...I really don't know what to do with this. Too boring.

EDIT: Changed /i/ to /e/ to make it more symmetrical.

[Drydic]

Does it have any diphthongs? Are there syllables other than (C)V?

For the love of all that is holy can we get a mod to put this in the thread title

[Wattmann]

A Ngith phonology, completely bullshitted on the spot:

Stops:
/p b t d k g q ɢ ʔ/

Fricatives:
/f s h/

Ejectives:
/m' n' p' t' k' q'/

Nasals:
/m n ɲ ŋ/

Approx/Misc.:
/j w ʁ/

Vowels:
/e a o/

Vowels can be phonemically nasalized, lengthened, and rhotacized.

The unvoiced-voiced stop phonemes are never actually realized as such. The "voiced" phonemes are actually glottalized in real speech.

...I really don't know what to do with this. Too boring.

EDIT: Changed /i/ to /e/ to make it more symmetrical.

Please shut the fuck up and crawl back into the shithole you came out of.
You can't have ejective nasals, nor that vowel system - it's impossible due to the human articulatory and auditory systems

[chris_notts]

Please shut the fuck up and crawl back into the shithole you came out of.
You can't have ejective nasals, nor that vowel system - it's impossible due to the human articulatory and auditory systems

You can have glottalised nasals though, and a number of languages with ejectives do. If you just replaced the word "ejective" with "glottalised" in his post then there wouldn't be a problem there. Of course, then you've got the problem that apparently his voiced stops are glottalised too...

As for the vowel system, it does seem unlikely due to the tendency for vowels to disperse more or less evenly across the available space. But certainly you do get vowel systems like /i e a o/, with the only back rounded vowel have [o] rather than as its main allophone, so he's only only phoneme away from having an attested system. His original /i a o/ is also attested I believe, although I'd have to check to be sure.

[Wattmann]

Please shut the fuck up and crawl back into the shithole you came out of.
You can't have ejective nasals, nor that vowel system - it's impossible due to the human articulatory and auditory systems

You can have glottalised nasals though, and a number of languages with ejectives do. If you just replaced the word "ejective" with "glottalised" in his post then there wouldn't be a problem there.

As for the vowel system, it does seem unlikely due to the tendency for vowels to disperse more or less evenly across the available space. But certainly you do get vowel systems like /i e a o/, with the only back rounded vowel have [o] rather than as its main allophone, so he's only only phoneme away from having an attested system.

You can have glottalised nasals, but not ejective nasals.

And, the Nahuatl system /i e a o/ is well balanced, having one high vowel - I don't think a single language lacks a high vowel - that is what I was refering to.

[Acid Badger]

Both /i a o/ and /e a o/ are found in native languages of the Americas, the former in the Muskogean languages, for example, and the latter in Yanesha' and Tehuelche.

[Wattmann]

Both /i a o/ and /e a o/ are found in native languages of the Americas, the former in the Muskogean languages, for example, and the latter in Yanesha' and Tehuelche.

Then, of course, I rest my case.


Still, it's extremely, extremely unlikely, as much as Nivkh's inventory of vowels is

[----]

Piraha has /i a o/. Also Abkhaz and Kabardian~Adyghe have no high vowels.

[Chagen]

Lol (T)wattman, like i give a shit about your opinion.

The Nasal Ejectives are phonemically ejectives but phonetically glottalized.

[----]

Lol (T)wattman, like i give a shit about your opinion.

This is not the kind of response you will solve problems with

[finlay]

Lol (T)wattman, like i give a shit about your opinion.

This is not the kind of response you will solve problems with

Yeah, this is why people don't like you. At the end of the day, there is nothing wrong with /a e o/, but just be nice to people, because it'll get you a long way.

[8Deer]

Blackfoot has /i a o/ and Cheyenne has /e a o/. Both systems have a lot of allophony, so I'd think if the same thing happened with Chagen's vowels, it would be plausible.

[cromulant]

Please shut the fuck up and crawl back into the shithole you came out of.
You can't have ejective nasals, nor that vowel system - it's impossible due to the human articulatory and auditory systems

You're a twat. I'm no friend of Chagen's but he did nothing to deserve that.

You're right about ejective nasals, but your comment about the vowel system is based on pure ignorance.

[Whimemsz]

Please shut the fuck up and crawl back into the shithole you came out of.
You can't have ejective nasals, nor that vowel system - it's impossible due to the human articulatory and auditory systems

You're a twat. I'm no friend of Chagen's but he did nothing to deserve that.

You're right about ejective nasals, but your comment about the vowel system is based on pure ignorance.

Wattmann has some never-ending feud against Chagen, which impels him to attack and/or try to bait Chagen every time the latter posts. That's the explanation for the dickishness here. It might be more bearable if Wattmann was ever right, but he rarely seems to be. Lesson: both Wattmann and Chagen should stop being dicks.

Blackfoot has /i a o/ and Cheyenne has /e a o/. Both systems have a lot of allophony, so I'd think if the same thing happened with Chagen's vowels, it would be plausible.

Cheyenne's vowels are spelled <e a o>, but <e> is really more like [ɪ] or [ɨ] most of the time. I don't know why Wikipedia lists it as "/e/".

[cromulant]

Amuesha reportedly has /a e o/.

ETA: looks like /e o/ have /i u/ allophones, so I don't know why they're analyzed that way.

[Whimemsz]

Amuesha reportedly has /a e o/.

Yeah, Amuesha is the same language as Yanesha', which Avo mentioned.

[Chagen]

Actually, I may have to add /i/ in there as well.

Otherwise, I can't example explain the <i> in the language's name, Ngith.

[----]

Otherwise, I can't example explain the <i> in the language's name, Ngith.

'/e/ is realized as in closed syllables, which is indicated in the orthography'

[Chagen]

Is that Naturalistic, though? Also, the orthography is used in-universe, are there any real natlang orthographies that are ohonetic like that?