Sound Change Quickie Thread

Substantial postings about constructed languages and constructed worlds in general. Good place to mention your own or evaluate someone else's. Put quick questions in C&C Quickies instead.
User avatar
Nortaneous
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 4544
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Location: the Imperial Corridor

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Nortaneous »

Nortaneous wrote:I need a good way to keep the dynamic negative copula forms in Arve distinct. Right now they're formed by the (very suppletive) negative auxiliary san/zigg/sambe + gerund(?) form (also the citation form) of the dynamic verb trei, although massive amounts of reduction has left the forms mostly indistinct. For example, the active singular, active plural, and passive plural are zigg trei, ziggs treis, and zeijer trei, pronounced [t͡sɪˈʈ͡ʂʌi̯], [t͡sɪʂˈʈ͡ʂʌi̯s], and [t͡sɪçˈʈ͡ʂʌi̯]. I was thinking I could introduce tone, but I'm not sure how much it'd appear outside the verb forms, since it'd obviously come from syllable reduction. For example, since zigg and ziggs only have one syllable in their full forms, but zeijer has two ([ˈt͡sɛh], [ˈt͡sɛç], [ˈt͡sʌi̯jɐ]), some sort of pitch accent thing could come in and make zeijer trei something like [t͡sɪç˥˩ˈʈ͡ʂʌi̯] or [t͡sɪçˈʈ͡ʂʌi̯˩˥]. I'd obviously prefer the second option, since it seems much less messy to have tone only appear on stressed syllables.

How realistic is that?
Addendum: What if I have a word with a V́VV́ stress pattern? The main stress is almost always on one of the two rightmost syllables, and each syllable two syllables from the syllable with main stress gets secondary stress, except over morpheme boundaries. Would I end up with V́˧VV́˩˥? V́˥˩VV́˩˥?

Also, what if syllables ending in a voiced consonant (including open syllables followed by a voiced consonant) get a lower tone? So sambeger trei would start off with a stress/tone pattern of V́˥V˩V˩V́˥ and end up with something like V́˧˩VV́˩˧, whereas sambesger treis would start off with V́˥V˧V˩V́˥ and end up with V́˥˧VV́˩˧?
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

User avatar
WeepingElf
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1630
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by WeepingElf »

How plausible is the change /x/ > /S/, based on this inventory?
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A

Bob Johnson
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:41 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Bob Johnson »

Nortaneous -- sorry, I'm horrible at tone.
WeepingElf wrote:How plausible is the change /x/ > /S/, based on this inventory?
If your /sk/ → /x/ (<sc> → <ch>) is still productive (in affixation e.g.) it might result in a retroflex or palatal instead -- otherwise okay, I guess.

User avatar
Dewrad
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:02 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Dewrad »

WeepingElf wrote:How plausible is the change /x/ > /S/, based on this inventory?
I really don't think that even a direct change /x/ > /S/ is at all unreasonable, but if you're concerned you could posit an intermediate stage of [C].
Some useful Dravian links: Grammar - Lexicon - Ask a Dravian
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)

User avatar
Nortaneous
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 4544
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Location: the Imperial Corridor

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Nortaneous »

Yeah fuckit I think I'm just gonna fuck the floating tones off to the rightmost stressed syllable they can attach to, moving from right to left and with a limitation of two tones per syllable. I guess that means the first tone in, say, a *vVvvV pattern would drop, but what the hell.
WeepingElf wrote:How plausible is the change /x/ > /S/, based on this inventory?
If I were you, I'd have /h/ develop some velar~uvular frication, at least around back vowels, and let that push /x/ up to /C/ and /S/ from there. Then you can drop the frication on /h/ if you want. So basically, it's definitely plausible.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

User avatar
WeepingElf
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1630
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by WeepingElf »

How about these:

as > i /_#
ax > u /_#

?
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A

User avatar
Nortaneous
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 4544
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Location: the Imperial Corridor

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Nortaneous »

I'd expect them to be part of a larger shift.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

User avatar
Mbwa
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:48 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Mbwa »

maybe you could do:

a > @ when in a final syllable
s > j / _#
x > w / _#
@j > i
@w > u
p_>-ts_>k_>-k_>k_>-pSSSSS

User avatar
WeepingElf
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1630
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by WeepingElf »

Mbwa wrote:maybe you could do:

a > @ when in a final syllable
s > j / _#
x > w / _#
@j > i
@w > u
Yes, that makes sense, and I have been thinking along that way.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A

Acid Badger
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Acid Badger »

Could I get an /l/ out of an /ŋʲ/? Maybe through /ŋʲ/ > /nʲ/ > /lʲ/?

User avatar
Ser
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:55 am
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia / Colombie Britannique, Canada

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Ser »

Perfectly possible. Cantonese is currently undergoing n > l / #_ for example.
Last edited by Ser on Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Tropylium⁺
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Tropylium⁺ »

Fanu wrote:Could I get an /l/ out of an /ŋʲ/? Maybe through /ŋʲ/ > /nʲ/ > /lʲ/?
Or a Slavic-like /l/-epenthesis: *ŋʲ :> ŋlʲ :>:> l.
Not actually new.

User avatar
Rui
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Beiʒing 拆那

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Rui »

Quick question(s) that is(are) somewhat related to sound changes (I didn't want to make my own thread):

Would it be more likely for a language to have /{y/ or /{}/? And in actual pronunciation (i.e. allophony), would this diphthong be more likely to end in [y] or [}]? This will also help with other related diphthongs like /Ey/ and /2y/ that I have as well. I wasn't sure which it would be, or even if such a distinction in transcription would matter. I randomly uncovered a phoneme inventory on my hard drive that is actually quite interesting, and I'm trying to develop it a little bit more and make it a little more realistic, so any answer to my question would be helpful :)

User avatar
Tropylium⁺
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Tropylium⁺ »

Chibi wrote:Would it be more likely for a language to have /{y/ or /{}/? And in actual pronunciation (i.e. allophony), would this diphthong be more likely to end in [y] or [}]?
My suggestion would be for /æy/ with a "cardinal" glide over /æʉ/. I could imagine [æʉ] existing allophonically if there's some sort of a general front-vowel-backing environment (or a *fronting* one — having /æu/ as the basic variant!), or in free variation if it's some kind of a sound change in progress (probably from a former *æu in that case).
Not actually new.

TallaFerroXIV
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:29 am

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by TallaFerroXIV »

I want to branch out my conlang.

How would I got from [um] to [ov]. and from [um] to [os]?
Image

User avatar
WeepingElf
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1630
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by WeepingElf »

TallaFerroXIV wrote:I want to branch out my conlang.

How would I got from [um] to [ov]. and from [um] to [os]?
[um] to [ov] is easy. A change um > om > ow > ov is quite plausible.

The other one is difficult; [m] and [s] are quite far away from each other in the phonetic space.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A

Cedh
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Cedh »

WeepingElf wrote:
TallaFerroXIV wrote:I want to branch out my conlang.

How would I got from [um] to [ov]. and from [um] to [os]?
[um] to [ov] is easy. A change um > om > ow > ov is quite plausible.

The other one is difficult; [m] and [s] are quite far away from each other in the phonetic space.
Add a suffix -s, and then delete [m] in V_C position.

User avatar
TzirTzi
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 10:26 am
Location: Oxford
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by TzirTzi »

[um] > [om] > [on] > [on_0] > [ot] > [ots] > [os]

But yeah, it's a very large change, as the above suggests something like:

u > o / _[+nasal]
m > n / _#
C > [-voice] / _#
[+nasal-voice] > [-nasal-sonorant]
t > ts / _#
ts > s

I don't think there's anything wrong with those steps (please someone shout out if they disagree :)) but they add up to a lot of change.
Salmoneus wrote:The existence of science has not been homosexually proven.

----
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by ---- »

I have a question! Alright, so for my conlang I have a set of fricatives: /ɸ θ x/ as well as voiced counterparts /β ð ɣ/. The fricatives are very 'light' I guess I could say, so I was going to implement a dialectical sound shift to approximants. I've got /β/>/β̞/ and /ɣ/>/ɰ/, so would it be reasonable for /ð/ to go to /ɹ/? And also what would be the resulting phonemes if the unvoiced ones followed suit? Thanks in advance.

User avatar
finlay
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3600
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Location: Tokyo

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by finlay »

Yes. Some people write [ð̞] (cf Danish), but I think this is unnecessary because [ɹ] (or maybe [ɹ̪] if you want to be pedantic) does the job just fine.

The voiceless fricatives might go to voiceless approximants (ie, [ɰ̊] and so on, with the voiceless diacritic), but these aren't very stable and just sound like weaker fricatives anyway, because it's difficult to distinguish voiceless approximants without making some sort of hissing at the point of closure, which is what a fricative is. I would keep them as fricatives myself unless you're trying to make space for something else. (if that makes sense)

The line between fricatives and approximants isn't very well defined, especially if as you say your fricatives are quite "weak" anyway; so I'd say you're very likely to end up with a situation where they're in free variation, or people use one or the other stylistically.

CaesarVincens
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:26 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by CaesarVincens »

I'm trying to resolve a morpheme combination that breaks my phonotactics.
I have a dual marker -k- and plural marker -n- which are placed just before the case markers /m, mtɪ, msa, mko/ resulting in such clusters as /kmko/.

I've decided that ceteres pares, /mtɪ, msa, mko/ become [mpsɪ], [nsa], and [ŋko], but throwing a /k/ or /n/ in the mix is too much for me to resolve well. Let alone noun stems ending in consonants. I'd like to keep fairly strict sonority based phonotactics, but I'm open to pretty much any phones.

The clusters before phonology

Code: Select all

m   km   nm
mtĭ kmtĭ nmtĭ
msa kmsa nmsa
mko kmko nmko

----
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by ---- »

finlay wrote:Yes. Some people write [ð̞] (cf Danish), but I think this is unnecessary because [ɹ] (or maybe [ɹ̪] if you want to be pedantic) does the job just fine.

The voiceless fricatives might go to voiceless approximants (ie, [ɰ̊] and so on, with the voiceless diacritic), but these aren't very stable and just sound like weaker fricatives anyway, because it's difficult to distinguish voiceless approximants without making some sort of hissing at the point of closure, which is what a fricative is. I would keep them as fricatives myself unless you're trying to make space for something else. (if that makes sense)

The line between fricatives and approximants isn't very well defined, especially if as you say your fricatives are quite "weak" anyway; so I'd say you're very likely to end up with a situation where they're in free variation, or people use one or the other stylistically.
Okay, thanks for the help! I think I've decided that I'll either make them in free variation or possibly allophones in different areas. The unvoiced ones I'm sure will stay fricatives, that seems like it would make more sense to me.

User avatar
finlay
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3600
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Location: Tokyo

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by finlay »

me too... as a rule of thumb, groups of sounds on the IPA that aren't in voiced-voiceless pairs don't tend to show up voiceless, at least not phonemically. They do, of course, they're just rarer.

User avatar
finlay
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3600
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Location: Tokyo

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by finlay »

CaesarVincens wrote:I'm trying to resolve a morpheme combination that breaks my phonotactics.
I have a dual marker -k- and plural marker -n- which are placed just before the case markers /m, mtɪ, msa, mko/ resulting in such clusters as /kmko/.

I've decided that ceteres pares, /mtɪ, msa, mko/ become [mpsɪ], [nsa], and [ŋko], but throwing a /k/ or /n/ in the mix is too much for me to resolve well. Let alone noun stems ending in consonants. I'd like to keep fairly strict sonority based phonotactics, but I'm open to pretty much any phones.

The clusters before phonology

Code: Select all

m   km   nm
mtĭ kmtĭ nmtĭ
msa kmsa nmsa
mko kmko nmko
Epenthetic schwa.

jmcd
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1034
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:46 am
Location: Réunion
Contact:

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by jmcd »

Or allophonically vocalic sonorants e.g. m/m=/C_C

Post Reply