Sound Change Quickie Thread

[Tropylium]

Also in Chukchi, though only to dissimilate two /r/s in consecutive syllables:

jara- < *ra-ra- ~ ra-
"house"

Is that necessarily *r → j though? IIRC Chukchi /r/ is from PCK *ð, and *ð → j would sound somewhat more plausible (e.g. *d- → *j- is known from Proto-Turkic, and I've seen this also reconstructed as *ð rather than *d; palatal → dental has happened frequently in Australian langs).

Also a similar shift *l → *ʎ → *j happened in Proto-Samoyedic (with exceptions in some positions, e.g. *lɤ → *lɤ, *Vla (? → *Vʎa) → *Vlä).

More on POA shifts, the assibilation "decay" of palatals is probably the most common example of an unconditional POA shift. E.g. PIE *ḱ across the various Satem languages yields
– Indo-Aryan *c → *tɕ → /ɕ/
– Nuristani *c → *tɕ → /tʃ/
– Lithuanian *c → *tʃ → /ʃ/
– Armenian and mainline Iranian *c → *tɕ → *ts → /s/
– Slavic and Latvian *c → *tʃ → *ʃ → /s/
– Albanian and Old Persian *c → *tɕ → *ts → /θ/

It'd be possible to put together a largely similar list for Vulgar Latin *c too.

[Tropylium]

Palatalisation of a consonant appearing before a front unrounded vowel, e.g. /i/, is obvious, but in a language with, say, /i y u/ is it possible for palatalisation to occur only before /i/ or would it occur before /y/ as well?

Yes, this is possible.

Finnic: *ti- → *tsi-, but *ty- remains.
Nganasan: Proto-Samoyedic *ki → /ʃi/, but Proto-Samoyedic *ky → /ki/.

[sangi39]

Palatalisation of a consonant appearing before a front unrounded vowel, e.g. /i/, is obvious, but in a language with, say, /i y u/ is it possible for palatalisation to occur only before /i/ or would it occur before /y/ as well?

Yes, this is possible.

Finnic: *ti- → *tsi-, but *ty- remains.
Nganasan: Proto-Samoyedic *ki → /ʃi/, but Proto-Samoyedic *ky → /ki/.

Well I didn't expect such a definitive reply so "long" after I asked the question, but such a happy coincidence given I was thinking about this at work again today.

A quick follow up question, though. Are the following changes, related to those posed in the original question, plausible:

Code: Select all

/i  y  u  e  ø  o  æ  a / > /i  y  u  e  ø  o  æ  a / > /ji  y  u  je  ø  o  jæ  a / > /ji  i  u  je  e  o  ja  a /
/i: y: u: e: ø: o: æ: a:/ > /i: iu u: e: eo o: æa a:/ > /ji: ju u: je: jo o: ja: a:/ > /ji: ju u: je: jo o: ja: a:/

Resulting in

/i u/
/e o/
/  a/

/ji ju/
/je jo/
/ja   /

/ji:/
/je:/
/ja:/

[gach]

Is that necessarily *r → j though? IIRC Chukchi /r/ is from PCK *ð, and *ð → j would sound somewhat more plausible (e.g. *d- → *j- is known from Proto-Turkic, and I've seen this also reconstructed as *ð rather than *d; palatal → dental has happened frequently in Australian langs).

That might be the case. It's simply a correspondence I've picked up along the road.

While we're at it, do you happen to know any detailed time line of the Forest Nenets /ɬ ɬʲ/ vs. Tundra Nenets /r rʲ/ correspondence?

[Tropylium]

While we're at it, do you happen to know any detailed time line of the Forest Nenets /ɬ ɬʲ/ vs. Tundra Nenets /r rʲ/ correspondence?

It's entirely plausible as a single-step change. I'm not sure what kind of details this would need?

T. Salminen's Notes on FN phonology [pdf] claims that this would have originally been a merger *l *r → *r, then a new /l/ emerging in certain positions, then *r → /ɬ/ at a later date, but you may have seen this already. It does seem that *l → /ɬ/ and *r → /l/ also happen, e.g. PU *kala "fish" → PSmy *kålä → TN /xaːlʲeː/ ~ FN /kaːɬʲeː/. At any rate, comparision with the rest of Samoyedic & Uralic shows that Tundra Nenets is conservative here.

For absolute chronology, supposedly the change is Khanty influence; so I figure it'd have to be dated between the northward expansion of the Ob-Ugrians beginning circa 17th-18th C, and the shift *ɬ *ɬʲ → /l lʲ/ in the northernmost Khanty dialects, recorded as such already in the earliest detailed fieldwork in the late 19th C?

[gach]

Yep, not questioning any believability, just wondering if there were some details I'd missed. So thanks for the last paragraph, tattista vaan.

[Whimemsz]

A quick follow up question, though. Are the following changes, related to those posed in the original question, plausible:

They seem plausible enough to me.

[sangi39]

A quick follow up question, though. Are the following changes, related to those posed in the original question, plausible:

They seem plausible enough to me.

Awesome!

[zyxw59]

Is there any way to get from implosives to prenasalized stops?

Alternatively, does:
ɓ -> ʔb -> pb -> p: (and likewise for other implosives)
look plausible?

[Tropylium]

Is there any way to get from implosives to prenasalized stops?

Probably? Both implosive → voiced stop and implosive → nasal are possible one-step changes, so I wouldn't be surprized to see implosive → prenasalized stop. Maybe even as a one-step change too, or thru something like *ɓ → *ʔb → *mb or *ɓ → *mɓ → *mb.

(I've yet to see a general treatise on the evolutionary behavior of implosives, though.)

Alternatively, does:
ɓ -> ʔb -> pb -> p: (and likewise for other implosives)
look plausible?

No problem overall, tho *ʔb → *ʔp → pː might be a more plausible pathway.

[Bristel]

pw > f?
tw > ?
kw > p?

I have a bunch of Cʁ Cn Cj Cw, and ʁC nC jC wC clusters I need to figure out for daughter langs.

Plus, would pə > po be possible?

[Hallow XIII]

Plus, would pə > po be possible?

Mandarin does this (well it's not a real schwa but the point is rounding after labials).

[Whimemsz]

pw > f?

This seems reasonable enough.

kw > p?

This is insanely common, so no problem at all.

Plus, would pə > po be possible?

Yes.

[Nortaneous]

Vowel system: /a ɛ ɔ i ɨ u aː ɛː ɛi̯ oː ɔu̯ iː ɨː uː/ and some other diphthongs that don't matter here. /eə̯ oə̯/ develop from various sources, mostly /e a/ before nasals (which then drop word-finally) but w+unstressed vowel also gives oə̯. What should I do with them? Note that /eə̯/ is pretty rare.

[zyxw59]

Vowel system: /a ɛ ɔ i ɨ u aː ɛː ɛi̯ oː ɔu̯ iː ɨː uː/ and some other diphthongs that don't matter here. /eə̯ oə̯/ develop from various sources, mostly /e a/ before nasals (which then drop word-finally) but w+unstressed vowel also gives oə̯. What should I do with them? Note that /eə̯/ is pretty rare.

I'm not sure how well this could work, but:
eə̯ oə̯ -> *eɐ̯ *oɐ̯ -> *eR *oR -> ɹ̩ ɹ̩ʷ
R being some rhotic
and I'm especially not sure about the last stage, but it might give you some ideas.

[Drydic]

Vowel system: /a ɛ ɔ i ɨ u aː ɛː ɛi̯ oː ɔu̯ iː ɨː uː/ and some other diphthongs that don't matter here. /eə̯ oə̯/ develop from various sources, mostly /e a/ before nasals (which then drop word-finally) but w+unstressed vowel also gives oə̯. What should I do with them? Note that /eə̯/ is pretty rare.

I'm not sure how well this could work, but:
eə̯ oə̯ -> *eɐ̯ *oɐ̯ -> *eR *oR -> ɹ̩ ɹ̩ʷ
R being some rhotic
and I'm especially not sure about the last stage, but it might give you some ideas.

Ahahahahahaha
This is funny because it's for a separate descendant of Middle English spoken in Pembrokeshire.

[Ser]

tw > ?

Latin underwent dw > b (duenos > bonus), so... [p]?

[jmcd]

Vowel system: /a ɛ ɔ i ɨ u aː ɛː ɛi̯ oː ɔu̯ iː ɨː uː/ and some other diphthongs that don't matter here. /eə̯ oə̯/ develop from various sources, mostly /e a/ before nasals (which then drop word-finally) but w+unstressed vowel also gives oə̯. What should I do with them? Note that /eə̯/ is pretty rare.

I'm not sure how well this could work, but:
eə̯ oə̯ -> *eɐ̯ *oɐ̯ -> *eR *oR -> ɹ̩ ɹ̩ʷ
R being some rhotic
and I'm especially not sure about the last stage, but it might give you some ideas.

To be honest, the reverse seems more reasonable. It's particularly the addition of the rhotic out of nowhere that seems out of place. Perhaps the reverse occured in a similar H lang and then hypercorrection appeared in the L lang once its social status changed?

[zyxw59]

Vowel system: /a ɛ ɔ i ɨ u aː ɛː ɛi̯ oː ɔu̯ iː ɨː uː/ and some other diphthongs that don't matter here. /eə̯ oə̯/ develop from various sources, mostly /e a/ before nasals (which then drop word-finally) but w+unstressed vowel also gives oə̯. What should I do with them? Note that /eə̯/ is pretty rare.

I'm not sure how well this could work, but:
eə̯ oə̯ -> *eɐ̯ *oɐ̯ -> *eR *oR -> ɹ̩ ɹ̩ʷ
R being some rhotic
and I'm especially not sure about the last stage, but it might give you some ideas.

To be honest, the reverse seems more reasonable. It's particularly the addition of the rhotic out of nowhere that seems out of place. Perhaps the reverse occured in a similar H lang and then hypercorrection appeared in the L lang once its social status changed?

What if there was already some R~ɐ̯ allophony in the language (e.g. German)?

[jmcd]

Then it could perhaps appear intervocalically, like in RP.

[ObsequiousNewt]

How is deleting /d/ before front /a e i/ and /b/ before /o u/?

[----]

I don't have any concrete examples, but as a rule, deletion is a very easy change to justify. With voiced stops it is certainly acceptable.

[CatDoom]

I've read that, in a few natural languages, vowel roundedness has been transferred to adjacent consonants, with the vowel becoming unrounded and the consonant becoming labialized. I was curious as to whether it might be at all plausible for a similar change to occur, affecting only one particular vowel. Specifically, I was wondering if the following changes make any sense:

C > Cʷ /_ɔ
ɔ > ɑ

[Drydic]

I've read that, in a few natural languages, vowel roundedness has been transferred to adjacent consonants, with the vowel becoming unrounded and the consonant becoming labialized. I was curious as to whether it might be at all plausible for a similar change to occur, affecting only one particular vowel. Specifically, I was wondering if the following changes make any sense:

C > Cʷ /_ɔ
ɔ > ɑ

I haven't seen a change like that, but I don't think it's too outlandish really.

Also the example languages are the Northwest Caucasian family.

[R.Rusanov]

You're asking if ɔ > wɑ by itself is an exceptional change. Why not? Spanish had o > we without affecting its other vowels.