zompist bboard

a congress of convoluted conworldery
It is currently Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:00 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2811 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108 ... 113  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:35 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 8:56 pm
Posts: 270
Location: Chaparral, NM
Soap wrote:
And if there's /b/, there's /p/

Not in Arabic unless I'm misunderstanding your post and you're referring to something else...

_________________
Current avatar by malibupup of FurAffinity.

My conlangs on this site:
Proto-Wideriver


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:39 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1433
Soap wrote:
On the other hand, maybe the /f/ of Osco-Umbrian was actually [v] in some position, and they just didnt bother with a separate symbol.

Highly plausible. Neo-Punic [v] (an allophone of /b/ before a consonant) was written <f> in Latin inscriptions.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:50 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11371
Location: Lake Tašpa
StrangerCoug wrote:
Soap wrote:
Chengjiang wrote:
What about fricatives undergoing fortition before [r], specifically [fr sr hr] > [pr tr kr]? I have fricative + rhotic clusters and I'd kind of like to get rid of them this way. [hr] > [kr] seems pretty natural to me, as does [sr] > [tr], but I'm less sure about [fr] > [pr] when [f] is unchanged in most environments.

[...]and if there's /b/, there's /p/, and where there's /p/, there's /t/.

Not in Arabic unless I'm misunderstanding your post and you're referring to something else...

Sorry, Im not sure why I wrote that. I posted that in the early (for me) morning, and may not have been thinking clearly yet.

I think I was assuming that Latin's change of /fr/ >>> /br/ had gone through */pr/, which I know is wrong, since it would have taken any existing /pr/ with it. The path was most likely /fr/ > */vr/ > /br/, with /fr/ remaining in initial position because the first step (voicing) did not happen in initial position.

This means Latin can't really be used as a precedent for the sound change of /fr/ > /pr/, so I'd say the original question should remain open. I think it's perfectly plausible, but I suspect that /f/ > /p/ is not a particularly common sound change except when the /f/ phoneme is disappearing entirely.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:17 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2551
Quote:
/fr/ > */vr/

Wasn't it the other way round?

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:13 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11371
Location: Lake Tašpa
Pole, the wrote:
Quote:
/fr/ > */vr/

Wasn't it the other way round?
I dont think it's possible to know and I've seen both paths proposed. I agree that /bʰ/ > /v/ with a secondary shift of /v/ > /f/ in initial position only would be simpler than /bʰ/ > /pʰ/ > /f/ with a secondary shift of /f/ > /v/ word-internally, but Latin is known to have done /s/ > /z/ (and in some positions later to /r/) word-internally and the voicing of other fricatives could merely have been part of that same shift. The devoicing of the voiced aspirates may have been an areal feature shared with Greek.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:48 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2551
Soap wrote:
Pole, the wrote:
Quote:
/fr/ > */vr/

Wasn't it the other way round?
I dont think it's possible to know and I've seen both paths proposed. I agree that /bʰ/ > /v/ with a secondary shift of /v/ > /f/ in initial position only would be simpler than /bʰ/ > /pʰ/ > /f/ with a secondary shift of /f/ > /v/ word-internally, but Latin is known to have done /s/ > /z/ (and in some positions later to /r/) word-internally and the voicing of other fricatives could merely have been part of that same shift. The devoicing of the voiced aspirates may have been an areal feature shared with Greek.

Well, it's only getting more complex, cf. /dʰ → ð → v → b/ vs /dʰ → tʰ → θ → f → v → b/ or /ɡʷʰ → ɣʷ → ɡʷ/ vs /ɡʷʰ → kʷʰ → xʷ → ɣʷ → ɡʷ/.

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:37 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11371
Location: Lake Tašpa
Pole, the wrote:
Soap wrote:
Pole, the wrote:
Quote:
/fr/ > */vr/

Wasn't it the other way round?
I dont think it's possible to know and I've seen both paths proposed. I agree that /bʰ/ > /v/ with a secondary shift of /v/ > /f/ in initial position only would be simpler than /bʰ/ > /pʰ/ > /f/ with a secondary shift of /f/ > /v/ word-internally, but Latin is known to have done /s/ > /z/ (and in some positions later to /r/) word-internally and the voicing of other fricatives could merely have been part of that same shift. The devoicing of the voiced aspirates may have been an areal feature shared with Greek.

Well, it's only getting more complex, cf. /dʰ → ð → v → b/ vs /dʰ → tʰ → θ → f → v → b/ or /ɡʷʰ → ɣʷ → ɡʷ/ vs /ɡʷʰ → kʷʰ → xʷ → ɣʷ → ɡʷ/.
But not unreasonable. Early Italic languages weren't attested until around 700 BC, whereas PIE is usually taken to have been spoken around 3000 BC or even earlier. Also, /s/ > /z/ > /r/ is known to have occurred between Old Latin and Classical Latin, which is just a few hundred years, so the last three steps of some of the other chains may have as well, if we assume that early Latin simply didnt bother to indicate allophonic voicing constrasts in fricatives.

Sorry about the terse reply, I cant get most websites to load right now. Does anyone know if PIE /s/ is specifically known to have been voiceless between vowels or is it just an edcucated guess?

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:37 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2864
Location: suburbs of Mrin
Soap wrote:
if PIE /s/ is specifically known to have been voiceless between vowels
I don't see how there is enough evidence for any such guess to be considered "educated" or not.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:05 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2551
Why would it be not? Is there any other branch besides Latin, where it is voiced unconditionally between vowels? Even in Germanic it is only in certain positions.

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:28 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3063
Location: Brittania
On the question of the Latin outcomes of the voiced aspirates, I saw a paper that argued the development on comparative grounds to have been *bʰ > *pʰ (later > f only after proto-Italic) > *f initially, while *bʰ > *β internally. I'll see if I can find it online.

Edit: found it
Edit2: After re-reading it, I realised I had slightly misremembered the development, which has now been corrected.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:58 pm 
Lebom
Lebom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:48 pm
Posts: 91
Location: The depths of the hyperreals
Would ɨ > y be realistic, if the original vowel system was /i ɛ u o ɑ/?

_________________
Bish Bash Rabadash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:54 pm 
Lebom
Lebom

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:13 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Ohio
smii wrote:
Would ɨ > y be realistic, if the original vowel system was /i ɛ u o ɑ/?


Do you mean it was originally /i ɛ u o ɑ ɨ/? If so, that's perfectly fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:42 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2551
I don't know, I find /ɨ → y/ a bit weird without a wider context. (For instance, I could believe /ɨ → ʉ/ adjacent to labials or conditioned by the presence of other rounded vowels in the same word, or both, followed by unconditional /ʉ → y/, but as a general change, I'd expect it rather to happen the other way around.)

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:32 pm 
Lebom
Lebom

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:13 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Ohio
I was getting some input on this on Tumblr, but I'm gonna ask here too:

Can anyone think of a change besides final vowels reduced to schwa > final consonants deleted > schwa deleted (much as in French) by which a predictable/regular marked form could become unpredictable/irregular - thus allowing it to become a base from which the original unmarked form can be predicted? E.g. kind of like what happened to many masculine-feminine forms in French:

V. Latin: frīctu, frīcta
French: fʀɛ, fʀɛʃ

V. Latin: falsu, falsa
French: fo, fos

(Context: I'm trying to come up with a diachronic situation in which a marked feminine noun class/gender becomes the default/unmarked gender.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:41 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2864
Location: suburbs of Mrin
From Latin?

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:08 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11371
Location: Lake Tašpa
Sorry Im not sure I understand the question. Wouldnt the unmarked form always be predictable if the marked form is just a suffix, however variable that suffix may be?

Also, I think final -s was preserved in the branch of Vulgar Latin that led to French, since it shows up in Old French in at least a certain set of words (filz for son) and even survives into modern French in a subset of that set.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:48 pm 
Lebom
Lebom

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:13 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Ohio
Sorry, it's kind of a weird question.

mèþru wrote:
From Latin?

Not from Latin - from any historical/phonological starting point you wish. It doesn't have to be masculine/feminine, but that's what I intend to do with it.

Soap wrote:
Sorry Im not sure I understand the question. Wouldnt the unmarked form always be predictable if the marked form is just a suffix, however variable that suffix may be?

Not necessarily - for example, as I tried to show above, if you start out with a system where final -u is regularly replaced by -a, but then drop all final vowels but /a/, and then delete final consonants, and then drop final /a/, then you can no longer predict the reflex of the a-form from the reflex of the u-form. But you can predict the new u-form from the new a-form, which could lead to speakers using the a-form as the new base. Like in this made-up example:

Initial stage: tokitu / tokita
Final high vowels dropped: tokit / tokita
Final consonants dropped: toki / tokita
Final low vowels dropped: toki / tokit

So now you can't predict the a-form from the u-form, because you don't know what the final consonant will be. It could be /s/, perhaps, from earlier tokisa. But given the reflex of the a-form, tokit, you can predict what the u-form will be - just drop the final consonant. That is, assuming there are tons of other words whose paradigms were affected by the same sound changes: ama/amak, ikatu/ikatuf, mulu/mulup, and so on. So speakers might just start viewing the reflex of the a-form as the base form of the word, from which the u-form is derived by dropping the final consonant.

So I was just wondering if anyone had ideas about any other phonological changes that could lead to this kind of reversal.

Soap wrote:
Also, I think final -s was preserved in the branch of Vulgar Latin that led to French, since it shows up in Old French in at least a certain set of words (filz for son) and even survives into modern French in a subset of that set.


AFAIK a relatively small number of French nouns are derived from the Latin nominative forms, but the great bulk of the nouns come from the accusative forms like in other Romance languages. (E.g. roi comes from rēgem, not rex.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:58 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2864
Location: suburbs of Mrin
You can change the order in languages that tend to end nouns in consonants:

Initial stage: tokitus / tokitam
Final consonants dropped: tokitu / tokita
Final high vowel dropped: tokit / tokita
Final low vowels dropped: toki / tokit

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 12:34 pm 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:55 pm
Posts: 22
I'm trying to derive a three-way contrast in plosives from a proto-lang that has none:

Old voiceless stops become the lenis series:
/k/ → /k~g/

Old clusters of stops and /h/ become aspirates.
/kh/ → /kʰ/

The final series would be from glottal stop and voiceless stop clusters:
/kʔ/ → ?

What sort of things could this become?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:29 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2864
Location: suburbs of Mrin
Glotallised consonants that could become creaky voiced, ejectives, implosives, a plain glottal stop or even completely elide.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:00 pm 
Lebom
Lebom

Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:13 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Ohio
They could also simply become geminates.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:13 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am
Posts: 2551
Sexendèƚo wrote:
I'm trying to derive a three-way contrast in plosives from a proto-lang that has none:

Old voiceless stops become the lenis series:
/k/ → /k~g/

Old clusters of stops and /h/ become aspirates.
/kh/ → /kʰ/

The final series would be from glottal stop and voiceless stop clusters:
/kʔ/ → ?

What sort of things could this become?

/pʔ tʔ kʔ/ → /ɓ ɗ ʔ/

_________________
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:45 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1433
Sexendèƚo wrote:
I'm trying to derive a three-way contrast in plosives from a proto-lang that has none:

Old voiceless stops become the lenis series:
/k/ → /k~g/

Old clusters of stops and /h/ become aspirates.
/kh/ → /kʰ/

The final series would be from glottal stop and voiceless stop clusters:
/kʔ/ → ?

What sort of things could this become?

Ejectives are the likeliest outcome.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:47 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2864
Location: suburbs of Mrin
Yeah, geminates are also possible. Out of all of these, I would say gemination and ejectives are much more likely than the others.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:43 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1433
I have a language in which an historical long/short contrast in the vowels became a distinction of quality (as is common enough). Most are more or less what you'd expect, but I have an odd one I'd like opinions on:

ø > ʏ
øː > ø (allophonically [y] in open syllables and a couple other environments)

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2811 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108 ... 113  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group