Sound Change Quickie Thread

[Nate]

Are the following sound changes realistic? The changes are for a romlang idea. And would it be realistic for these to be the only instances of æ, œ, and y? The instances would be widespread (mostly in the accusative case), but restricted to these positions.

a → ə → œ̃ /_N(C)# (probably not going to use this one, but I'm curious)
aː → ã /_N(C)#
e → ɛ → æ̃ /_N(C)#
eː → e → ɛ /_N(C)#
i → ỹ /_N(C)#
iː → i /_N(C)#
u → œ̃ /_N(C)#
uː → u /_N(C)#

What bugs me is that /æ/, /œ/ and /y/ only occur nasalizedly. You should also have unnasalized /æ/, /œ/ and /y/, I think. Languages tend to have fewer nasalized than unnasalized vowels, not more. And why does /a:/ nasalize while the other long vowels don't?

1. All right. I'll think of a way to plug in those. Perhaps diphthongs?

ai → æ
oi → œ
eu → y

2. Uh, because the chart was slightly rushed. Though, to be honest, it's easier, for me at least, to pronounce ã than the other nasalized vowels.

[WeepingElf]

What bugs me is that /æ/, /œ/ and /y/ only occur nasalizedly. You should also have unnasalized /æ/, /œ/ and /y/, I think. Languages tend to have fewer nasalized than unnasalized vowels, not more. And why does /a:/ nasalize while the other long vowels don't?

1. All right. I'll think of a way to plug in those. Perhaps diphthongs?

ai → æ
oi → œ
eu → y

Yes, those make perfect sense.

2. Uh, because the chart was slightly rushed. Though, to be honest, it's easier, for me at least, to pronounce ã than the other nasalized vowels.

Indeed, nasalized vowels are more easily pronounced when they are open. Nazalized high vowels such as [ĩ] and [ũ] tend to get lowered, as happened in French.

[Ser]

What bugs me is that /æ/, /œ/ and /y/ only occur nasalizedly. You should also have unnasalized /æ/, /œ/ and /y/, I think.

Parisian French has /æ̃/ without an /æ/ distinct from /ä/.

Indeed, nasalized vowels are more easily pronounced when they are open. Nazalized high vowels such as [ĩ] and [ũ] tend to get lowered, as happened in French.

Portuguese seems to be doing fine with them though... Also: [ɔ̃] got higher in Parisian French, now [õ].

[Thry]

In fact in Portuguese nasalized 'a' is always closed, never open.

[Nortaneous]

Are the following sound changes realistic?

No. High front vowels don't spontaneously round, and why do only some of the long vowels nasalize?

Indeed, nasalized vowels are more easily pronounced when they are open. Nazalized high vowels such as [ĩ] and [ũ] tend to get lowered, as happened in French.

Nasal vowels are less distinct than oral vowels, and tend to merge. Sometimes you end up losing the hgh vowels; sometimes the mid.

[The Hanged Man]

How can a syncope (loss of word-medial vowel) be conditioned? I thought of dropping an unstressed vowel before stressed syllable, or loss of supershort vowel, but I have no idea about other possible conditions.

[Monk]

How can a syncope (loss of word-medial vowel) be conditioned? I thought of dropping an unstressed vowel before stressed syllable, or loss of supershort vowel, but I have no idea about other possible conditions.

Assuming C₁-V-C₂, when the C is a specific pulmonic consonant, like when C₁ and C₂ are both voiceless, or C₂ is nasal and C₁ is voiceless. That's what I do, at least.

[The Hanged Man]

Are these sound changes:

aa → aː
ae → æː
ai → ai
ao → oː
au → au
ea → æ:
ee → eː
ei → ei
eo → øː
eu → eu
ia → ja
ie → je
ii → iː
io → jo
iu → ju
oa → wa
oe → we
oi → wi
oo → oː
ou → ou
ua → wa
ue → we
ui → wi
uo → wo
uu → uː

plausible in this set (as opposed to the same changes occuring with other vowel shifts)?

What changes can I make to this set, to get another one, with intend to use one set in a stressed syllable, and one in unstressed?

[Wattmann]

You should make that one set split into two:

i u > j w / _V ! _{i u}
VV > V:

Then the rest which aren't eliminated by the above.

[Click]

Can BN (oBstruent+Nasal) clusters become prenasalised obstruents?

[WeepingElf]

Can BN (oBstruent+Nasal) clusters become prenasalised obstruents?

I think yes. This is essentially a metathesis. Especially likely in intervocalic position.

[Qwynegold]

Are these sound changes:

aa → aː
ae → æː
ai → ai
ao → oː
au → au
ea → æ:
ee → eː
ei → ei
eo → øː
eu → eu
ia → ja
ie → je
ii → iː
io → jo
iu → ju
oa → wa
oe → we
oi → wi
oo → oː
ou → ou
ua → wa
ue → we
ui → wi
uo → wo
uu → uː

plausible in this set (as opposed to the same changes occuring with other vowel shifts)?

What changes can I make to this set, to get another one, with intend to use one set in a stressed syllable, and one in unstressed?

All of those are perfectly plausible. If you want to do something else with those vowel clusters in the same language, and want my ideaon it, then have those changes that you proposed happen in stressed syllables, and in unstressed syllables get rid of diphthongs all together. Something like this:

u → w / _V
i → j / _V
V₁V₁ → V₁ː
ae → æː
ai → eː
ao → oː
au → oː
ea → æ:
ei → iː
eo → øː
eu → øː
ou → uː
V[+long, -stressed] → V[-long, -stressed]

That's just my suggestion. There are millions of possibilities.

[The Hanged Man]

Thanks for the answers!

Another idea, and new questions: I'm going to create a language, that lacks bilabial consonants (like Iroquoian, or some other languages of Americas). First, I wanted to just make it by fiat, but then I had an idea of making it a result of a sound change, that will be one of the first changes in development of two related languages. Here are sound changes, that would happen:

f > h - that one is not problematic

kʷ > p - in one dialect
and
p > kʷ - in another one. This sound change would be effect of hypercorrection - exaggerated avoidance of the change kʷ > p, present in the first dialect.

And the question is: do you think it is naturalistic?

Another thing is that I don't know what to do with [m] to make it dissapear... I know w > m changes occur, but would it be possible to have opposite change: m > w? And are there any other possibilities?

[Cedh]

kʷ > p - in one dialect
and
p > kʷ - in another one. This sound change would be effect of hypercorrection - exaggerated avoidance of the change kʷ > p, present in the first dialect.

p > kʷ has (most likely) happened in some Athabascan languages (as part of a wider consonant shift where Proto-Athabaskan *ts ends up all over the place in the various dialects of one subgroup of the family: [tθ] in Slavey, [p] in Mountain, [p] ~ [kʷ] in Hare, [kʷ] in Bearlake and Dogrib; since most other plosives and affricates between the alveolar and velar POA (including several labialised ones) generally remain in place, this distribution is probably the result of a shift ts > tθ (> pf) > p > kʷ). The sound change itself is certainly possible; making it unconditional through hypercorrection is fairly radical but it seems naturalistic enough that you can get away with it IMO.

Another thing is that I don't know what to do with [m] to make it dissapear... I know w > m changes occur, but would it be possible to have opposite change: m > w? And are there any other possibilities?

m > w is attested in a good number of languages, both intervocalically (especially when followed by an unstressed vowel) and in coda position. Making [m] disappear in stressed or word-initial onsets is harder, but I suppose you could pull it off via vowel nasalisation, which in turn may get lost later on (e.g. *ma > *wã > wa), especially if you have an early intermediate phase where original *w gets realised as [m] adjacent to nasalised vowels (in the other dialect...) so you can use a hypercorrection-by-analogy effect to support reanalysis of all [m] as underlying /w/. If there's no similar alternation at the coronal POA, that would also explain why *n remains a nasal.

[The Hanged Man]

Thanks! But now I'm thinking that I could make it another way:

p > f
f > h

and then in one of decendants of my language:

kʷ > p

This would be probably more naturalistic, and the result would be the same.

[WeepingElf]

Thanks! But now I'm thinking that I could make it another way:

p > f
f > h

and then in one of decendants of my language:

kʷ > p

This would be probably more naturalistic, and the result would be the same.

That's basically what happened in Gaulish and British Celtic (but with an additional /h/ > 0), so you are fine!

[suelior]

C[+nasal] w / C[-sonorant]_#

Is this sound change too weird? if so

m w / C[-sonorant]_#

is this also too weird? I think the second one seems to be the more plausible of the two, but I'd like it better if the first one isn't all that ridiculous too...
And I guess ɱ w / C[-sonorant]_# would be more plausible than the second one?

[WeepingElf]

C[+nasal] w / C[-sonorant]_#

Is this sound change too weird?

Yes. It looks like a random substitution, not a naturalistic sound change.

if so

m w / C[-sonorant]_#

is this also too weird? I think the second one seems to be the more plausible of the two, but I'd like it better if the first one isn't all that ridiculous too...
And I guess ɱ w / C[-sonorant]_# would be more plausible than the second one?

m > w can happen, but I'd expect it intervocalically rather than word-final after obstruents, where it violates the sonority principle. (But words with a final /m/ after obstruent are already quite weird. That /m/ should either become a labial obstruent, or a vowel.)

[suelior]

C[+nasal] w / C[-sonorant]_#

Is this sound change too weird?

Yes. It looks like a random substitution, not a naturalistic sound change.

if so

m w / C[-sonorant]_#

is this also too weird? I think the second one seems to be the more plausible of the two, but I'd like it better if the first one isn't all that ridiculous too...
And I guess ɱ w / C[-sonorant]_# would be more plausible than the second one?

m > w can happen, but I'd expect it intervocalically rather than word-final after obstruents, where it violates the sonority principle. (But words with a final /m/ after obstruent are already quite weird. That /m/ should either become a labial obstruent, or a vowel.)

Thanks. I thought the first sound change seemed weird but was just hoping maybe.

ɱ ɱɯ w / C[-sonorant]_#
Would explaining it like this make it better? ɯ is the least marked vowel in the system.

[communistplot]

t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ʎ̥ t͡ɕ d͡ʑ / #_
t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ɬ ɕ ʑ / V_V / C_

Plausible?

[WeepingElf]

t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ʎ̥ t͡ɕ d͡ʑ / #_
t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ɬ ɕ ʑ / V_V / C_

Plausible?

In the first line, I'd expect the outcomes of the first two phonemes to be flipped, but otherwise, it looks quite plausible; I have seen weirder things in natlangs. In one of my own projects, I have /t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ/ > /t͡ɕ t͡ɕʰ d͡ʑ/.

[communistplot]

t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ʎ̥ t͡ɕ d͡ʑ / #_
t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ → ɬ ɕ ʑ / V_V / C_

Plausible?

In the first line, I'd expect the outcomes of the first two phonemes to be flipped, but otherwise, it looks quite plausible; I have seen weirder things in natlangs. In one of my own projects, I have /t͡ɬ t͡ɬʰ d͡ɮ/ > /t͡ɕ t͡ɕʰ d͡ʑ/.

Yeah, I thought so as well but I'd second guessed and switched it around to that.

[Ambrisio]

How about this sound change?

dw -> erk

[Drydic]

Not funny.

[Ambrisio]

Not funny.

You are all geniuses.