Post your conlang's phonology

[Bristel]

-Athanic-
/p b t d k ɡ ʔ/ <p b t d c g '>
/m n ŋ/ <m n ń>
/r r̥ ɾ l l̥/ <ŕ hŕ r l hl>
/f v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ x ɣ h/ <f~ph v~bh th dh s z sh zh ch gh h>
/j w/ <j w>

/i iː y yː u uː e eː ø ə ɤ ɤː ɛ ɛː ɔ ɔː a aː/ <i ii ü üü u uu e ee oe e~a ö e ee o oo a aa>
/ĩ ẽ ɛ̃ ã ũ ɔ̃/ <į ę ę ą ų ǫ>

Allophony:
/k/ → [c] <c> /_i, _e
/g/ → [ɟ] <g>
/n/ → [ɲ] <n>
/s/ → [ɕ] <s>
/z/ → [ʑ] <z>
/x/ → [ç] <ch>
/ɣ/ → [ʝ] <gh>


Phonotactics:

CV(V/C)(C)(:)

(restrictions haven't been created yet, but I think most words will have POA cluster restrictions)

Trust me, this phonology used to be worse... it once had a pharyngeal consonant, and pharyngealized vowels...

[masako]

http://www.frathwiki.com/Kala#Pronunciation

[WeepingElf]

Old Albic

Consonants

/p t k/ <p t c>
/b d g/ <b d g>
/f T s x h/ <ph th s ch h>
/m n N/ <m n ng>
/w l r j/ <v l r j>

Vowels

/a e i o u ø y/ <a e i o u ø y>

Each of the vowels short, long with thrusting (high-falling) or slipping (falling-rising-falling) tone.
Thrusting tone is marked <á é ...>, slipping tone <â ê ...>.

Long vowels in closed syllables or at the end of the word are shortened, except in monosyllables.

Syllable structure

(C(R))V((N)K)

C=any consonant
R=/w l r/, C then must be /p t k b d g f T x/
V=any vowel
N=/m n N l r/, K must then be /p t k b d g f T x/, and if N is a nasal, N and K must be homorganic
K=any consonant except /h/

Accent

Pitch accent on the penultimate syllable if that syllable is heavy (closed or with long vowel), otherwise on the antepenultimate. Note: a stop+liquid cluster counts as belonging entirely to the following syllable.

[roninbodhisattva]

A small random phonology I came up with inspired by Miapimoquitch, Tokana and Numic languages.

Stop/affricates: /p t ts k q/ p t z k q
Fricatives: /θ s h/ th s h
Nasals: /m n/ m n
Resonants: /w l ɾ y/ w l r y

Short Vowels: /i ʉ u e o a/ i ü u e o a[/b]
Long vowels: /i: u: a:/ ii uu aa
Diphthongs: /ia ʉa ua ea ai/ ia üa ua ea ai

Syllables must have an onset, but word initially there may be empty onsets. Between vowels, there may occur a single consonant (any C), a geminate obstruent or nasal (except /h/), a nasal + obstruent cluster, or miscellaneous clusters. Between vowels, the stops are voiced and spirantized. After a nasal, the stops appear voiced. Fricatives are voiced after a long vowel or diphthong.High vowels are devoiced between /h/ and a voiceless consonant or after /h/ word finally:

/p t ts k q/ > [β ð z ɣ ʁ] / V_V
/mp nt nts ŋk nq/ > [mb nd n(d)z ŋg ɴɢ]
/θ s h/ > [ð z ɣ] / VV_
/i ʉ u/ > [I Ü U] / h_{C-vc, #}

Root finally, the consonants [t k s n ɾ] or a 'final feature' may occur. Other morphemes do not end in consonants, but instead end in final features. Either spirantizing (written =), geminating (written +), or nasalizing (written N). These interact with following initial consonants in various ways. I won't go into that here.

[roninbodhisattva]

A small random phonology I came up with inspired by Miapimoquitch, Tokana and Numic languages.

Stop/affricates: /p t ts k q/ p t z k q
Fricatives: /θ s h/ th s h
Nasals: /m n/ m n
Resonants: /w l ɾ y/ w l r y

Short Vowels: /i ʉ u e o a/ i ü u e o a[/b]
Long vowels: /i: u: a:/ ii uu aa
Diphthongs: /ia ʉa ua ea ai/ ia üa ua ea ai

Syllables must have an onset, but word initially there may be empty onsets. Between vowels, there may occur a single consonant (any C), a geminate obstruent or nasal (except /h/), a nasal + obstruent cluster, or miscellaneous clusters. Between vowels, the stops are voiced and spirantized. After a nasal, the stops appear voiced. Fricatives are voiced after a long vowel or diphthong.High vowels are devoiced between /h/ and a voiceless consonant or after /h/ word finally:

/p t ts k q/ > [β ð z ɣ ʁ] / V_V
/mp nt nts ŋk nq/ > [mb nd n(d)z ŋg ɴɢ]
/θ s h/ > [ð z ɣ] / VV_
/i ʉ u/ > [I Ü U] / h_{C-vc, #}

Root finally, the consonants [t k s n ɾ] or a 'final feature' may occur. Other morphemes do not end in consonants, but instead end in final features. Either spirantizing (written =), geminating (written +), or nasalizing (written N). These interact with following initial consonants in various ways. I won't go into that here.

[kaleissin]

Whoa, this just made me realize that the phoneme inventory on the webpages for Taruven is way outdated.

[kaleissin]

Whoa, this just made me realize that the phoneme inventory on the webpages for Taruven is way outdated.

But: here it is:

Consonants

Code: Select all

p  b                  t  d              k  g    
ph bh                 th dh             kh gh
m                     n                 ŋ
hm                    hn
                      r
                      hr
        f  v   þ  ð   s  z   š  ž              h
        hf hv     ðh  hs
                                    j   x
                                        hx
                      l

IPA except: ð is /θ/, š is /ʃ/ ~ /ʂ/, ž is /ʒ/ ~ /ʐ/, x is /x/ ~ unvoiced /ɰ/, h next to a sound is for breathiness/aspiration.

Vowels:

Code: Select all

i y ʉ u
e
      ɑ

Length is phonemic for all vowels and all consonants except {x}. In addition there's an approximant written {ř} which is /ʀr/ ~ /ʀʁ/. And lots and lots of diphthongs, both falling and rising.

[Edit:] Forgot bh and hm

[finlay]

þ would be θ and ð would be ð surely - typo?

[Nortaneous]

Tzerei, a thing that might become yet another Hathic lang. I'll probably end up killing it but whatever.

Code: Select all

i ɨ u            i ı u   
e                e    
ɛ   a            ĕ   a

  t͡θ t t͡ɕ   k ʔ      tx t tz   k '
v ɾ    ɾ͡ʑ          v    r rz
  θ  s ɕ    ɦ        x  s z      h
m n                m n
       j                  i

[Radius Solis]

Oh fine, which do you want? How about some old unnamed false starts from the ass end of my conlanging folder.

Unnamed #1

plain stops /p t tʃ k q ʔ/
voiced stops /b d dʒ/
pharyngealized stops /kˤ qˤ/
fricatives /f s ɬ ʃ ħ h/
voiced fricative /z/
nasals /m n/
approximants /w l j ʁ ʁˤʷ/
chronemes /ː/
vowels /a e i o u/


Unnamed #2

plain stops /p t k kʷ ʔ ʔʷ/
voiced stops /b d g gʷ/
affricates /ʦ ʔh/
fricatives /f s ʃ ʃʷ x h hʷ/
nasals /m n ɲ ŋ ŋʷ/
flaps /ѵ ɾ/ (that's a labiodental flap, if it doesn't show up properly)
laterals /l ʟ/
glides /j w/
vowels /a e i u o ɔ/
tonemes /high mid/



Bonus: Jamna Kopiai. Entire inventory: /p t k dʒ g f s h m n r a i o/

[WeepingElf]

affricates /ʦ ʔh/

A glottal affricate!? Never met that before. But, why not?

[Jipí]

Also it contrasts labialized and plain [ʃ]. Does that mean, while AFAIK English /ʃ/ is labialized, your /ʃ/ isn't?

[finlay]

affricates /ʦ ʔh/

A glottal affricate!? Never met that before. But, why not?

It's an interesting idea, certainly... not sure if it's attested in natlangs though. There's also nothing to distinguish it from [ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop. The glottal POA does do weird things, though, since it's also the place where the vocal folds vibrate to create voicing (a glottal stop is not voiceless, for instance, nor is it voiced; it's the absence of voicing), so I would never assume anything about it. Certainly this sound is possible to make, however.

[Nortaneous]

[ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop

Is this attested in natlangs?

[cybrxkhan]

[ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop

Is this attested in natlangs?

Is it even possible for the glottal stop to have other consonant qualities, like having it be velarized or labialized or have a creaky voice or whatever?

[finlay]

[ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop

Is this attested in natlangs?

Don't think so, as I said - I was just pointing out a feature of the glottal POA, that there is no phonetic or articulatory difference between [ʔh] and [ʔʰ].

I'm not very good at natlang attestations, really. I'm probably better at phonetics than phonology, if it comes to it.

[vec]

Uscaniv

Consonants:

p t z c /p t ts k/
f s ś h /f s ʃˠ h/
v /ʋ/
m n /m n/
l /l/
r /rˠ/

Vowels:

a e i u /ɐ ɛ ɪ ʊ/
ai au ei iu ui ie (ua) /aj aw ɛj ju uj jɛ wa/

Imuthan

p t kj k kp /p t c k kp/
b d gj g gb /b d ɟ g gb/
m n ņj ņ ņm /m n ɲ ŋ ŋm/
f ț s ķj ķ ķw /f θ s ç x ʍ/
v r j ŗ w /v ɹ j ɰ w/
l ļj ļ /l ʎ ʟ/

a e ê i û u ô o (â) /a ɛ e i ɨ u o ɔ ə/
ai ei/oi au eu/ou uo /ai əi au əu uɔ/
aie oui aue /aiə əui auə/

Kiassan Turasta

t k /t k/
m n /m n/
s st /s st/
d/r /d~ɾ/
w l y /w l j/

a e i o u /a e i o u/
ii uu /iː uː/
ai ei ia ie io au eu ou ua ue uo ui /ai ei ia ie io au eu ou ua ue uo ui/

[ná'oolkiłí]

Is it even possible for the glottal stop to have other consonant qualities, like having it be velarized or labialized or have a creaky voice or whatever?

It can certainly have secondary articulations (Karbardian has /ʔʷ/), but I'm pretty sure other types of phonation are by definition impossible.

Don't think so, as I said - I was just pointing out a feature of the glottal POA, that there is no phonetic or articulatory difference between [ʔh] and [ʔʰ].

Is there one between, say, [th] and [tʰ] (discounting syllable boundaries)? (Not a rhetorical question)

[finlay]

Oh.... I dunno. Maybe I'm talking out my arse. I'm more saying that there wouldn't be any difference between the aspirate and the affricate of a glottal stop, anyway.

One to look up, anyway... I suspect that as with many other distinctions, it may be somewhat arbitrary and dependent on the language. (similar to eg the difference between [ɬ] and [l̥] – usually the difference between the two is that [ɬ] is more forceful, but this is basically arbitrary because when devoicing the approximant you get some degree of frication anyway)

[Bob Johnson]

Phoneme inventories are boring on their own, so here's the phonology section for Tasak Nos.

Code: Select all

              Bilabial  Alveolar  Palatal   Velar     Glottal
Stop          p b       t d                 k g
Fricative     f v       s z                 x ɣ       h
Nasal         m         n                   ŋ
Approximant   w                   j
Tap/trill               r

        Front   Center  Back
Close   i               u
Mid     e               o
Open            a

Syllables are (C)V(C), with CV preferred over VC. The onset may be any consonant, although /w/ and /j/ are not distinguished before /u/ and /i/ respectively. The coda can be any consonant except /h/, /w/, and /j/. Vowel length is phonemic, with a contrast between short <a> [a] and long <ā> [aː]. Adjacent vowels are not allowed. Gemination of consonants is phonemic, though it can occur only across a syllable boundary: one syllable ends with a consonant, and the next begins with the same one. Stress does not distinguish words; it always falls on the first syllable.

The voiceless stops are aspirated unless followed by a fricative or another stop: the fricative absorbs the aspiration, and the stop cuts it off. Voiced stops are never aspirated and are fully voiced in word-medial and final positions. Word-initially, their voice onset time is later than in other positions; they may be partially or fully devoiced there. In a pair of dissimilar voiced stops, the first may not achieve full closure and will thus resemble a fricative. A geminate stop, voiceless or voiced, is simply held closed longer, then released with or without aspiration as appropriate.

For example:

• /kemin/ → [ˈkʰemin] "mother"
• /maka/ → [ˈmakʰa] "tribe"
• /sek/ → [ˈsekʰ] "me"
• /takse/ → [ˈtʰakse] "north" -- aspiration is absorbed by a following fricative
• /tikpe/ → [ˈtʰikpʰe] "three" -- and cut off by a following stop
• /negde/ → [ˈnegde] or [ˈneɣde] "dirt" -- voiced stops might weaken before a different voiced stop
• /botas/ → [ˈb̥otʰas] or [ˈp⁼otʰas] "west" -- voicing is reduced or lost initially; contrast is by aspiration
• /nakkan/ → [ˈnak̚kʰan] "not eat" -- geminate stops are held closed

For most speakers, <r> is a tap [ɾ] and <rr> is a trill [r]; for some, <r> is a short trill [r] and <rr> is a longer trill [rː]. (There is some debate on which is "correct;" the author writes /r/ as the base phoneme for simplicity only, and does not intend this to imply approval or disapproval of either side of this debate.)

/ɣ/ occurs only as a result of certain affixation and assimilation processes, but it is distinctive, if somewhat rare. Since these processes are clearly marked in this text, both /x/ and /ɣ/ are written <x> for simplicity of representation.

There is significant regional variation in the realization of /x/ and /ɣ/. A majority of speakers have [x ɣ]. Some have [χ ʁ], a few even [ħ ʕ] or [ʀ ʀ]. (Again, the author writes /x ɣ/ for simplicity only.) The variation extends to /kx/ and /gɣ/ clusters: speakers will have either [kx gɣ] or [qχ ɢʁ], or one of the less common realizations, but not [kχ gʁ] -- the cluster must have only one point of articulation.

In native terminology, /x/ and /ɣ/ are considered "harsh" or "strong" sounds that "conquer" many other sounds rather than living together in peace. They occur in /kx/ and /gɣ/ clusters, but no other configurations involving stops are possible. They are completely incompatible with other fricatives. They may occur adjacent to nasals and /r/, intervocalically, and in the geminates /xx/ and /ɣɣ/.

In contrast, /h/ is "soft" or "weak." Where /x/ "conquers" other sounds, /h/ "submits." When affixation would threaten a /tx/ cluster, for instance, it is converted to /kx/. However, /th/ becomes simply /t/. /w/ and /j/ also "submit" in this way and are dropped after a consonant.

The nasals likewise "submit" to stops by assimilating to the stop's place of articulation: /np/ must become /mp/, /mt/ must become /nt/, and /ng/ must become /ŋg/.

All clusters must "decide" on voicing except those involving /r/ or a nasal. Pairs of nasals must likewise decide on a single place of articulation. This is not based on the individual sounds, but rather their role in the word. For instance, a stem consonant will always change to match the voicing of a suffix consonant.

Finally, to prevent adjacent vowels, /h/ is inserted if necessary. Some speakers realize this as [ʔ] rather than [h]. This is described as "separation," as though by a wall.

In careful speech, these processes will only apply within words, but rushed speakers will often render e.g. /tasak nos/ as [tʰasakʰ ŋos]. Nasal and voicing assimilation are the most commonly found processes here. Vowel separation does occur as well, though many speakers ignore that constraint across word boundaries.

[Nortaneous]

[ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop

Is this attested in natlangs?

Is it even possible for the glottal stop to have other consonant qualities, like having it be velarized or labialized or have a creaky voice or whatever?

There are some langs in Africa with a palatalized glottal stop, written <ƴ>, and I think Arabic is commonly analyzed as having a pharyngealized glottal stop. Secondary articulations on the glottal stop are possible; other phonations, as far as I know, aren't.

Also, I think there are some natlangs with a "nasalized glottal stop", which is realized as a glottal stop with nasalization on either the preceding or following vowel; I can't remember which. A quick search of Wikipedia, however, shows only Tundra Nenets, which has a "nasalizable glottal stop", which does... damned if I can make any sense out of that description, but whatever.

[Radius Solis]

affricates /ʦ ʔh/

A glottal affricate!? Never met that before. But, why not?

It's an interesting idea, certainly... not sure if it's attested in natlangs though. There's also nothing to distinguish it from [ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop. The glottal POA does do weird things, though, since it's also the place where the vocal folds vibrate to create voicing (a glottal stop is not voiceless, for instance, nor is it voiced; it's the absence of voicing), so I would never assume anything about it. Certainly this sound is possible to make, however.

In this case the oddly well-filled-out glottal series was meant to be the result of a former uvular series that got backed - the labioglottals came from original labiouvulars, and the glottal affricate started life as an aspirated uvular stop. After a shift in how the other stop series were articulated (due to the fronter stops all having voiced partners), *qʰ was left the sole aspirated stop, and then the uvular>glottal change happened and so there we are, an aspirated/affricated glottal stop.

Also it contrasts labialized and plain [ʃ]. Does that mean, while AFAIK English /ʃ/ is labialized, your /ʃ/ isn't?

No, my /ʃ/ is like everyone else's I know - technically labialized, but in a way very different to [w]. In [w] the lips tighten together in a rounded shape to restrict airflow in an audible way; in English /ʃ/ the lips instead open wider than they otherwise would, and it does not strongly affect the sound of the fricative - you might be able to see the difference on a spectrogram, but telling the difference by ear is next to impossible. Because it is so different from the sort of labialization we get in [w], I dislike calling the English fricative "labialized" or /ʃʷ/ because it gives people the wrong idea about it.

Whereas the /ʃ - ʃʷ/ contrast in the conlang inventory above is meant to be an entirely normal sort of labialization contrast of exactly the type often seen with velars.

[finlay]

I think it does affect the sound of the fricative. It's significantly lower pitch. Helps to distinguish from /s/. My lips are quite protruded when I make it (and I imagine yours are too by the sounds of it, and because I don't think there's any significant dialectal variation in this) – the protruded-rounding and compressed-rounding are distinguished in some languages apparently. My phonetics teacher gave the example of Stockholm Swedish's high vowels. (We all had a good laugh at said vowels, incidentally, when he made them, partly because he'd primed it as a 'silly-sounding' accent. He's English but speaks Finland-swedish...)

Japanese /u/ is sort of compressed-rounding, in that it's not 'rounded' like the cardinal back vowels but it's not really unrounded [ɯ] exactly because the lips aren't spread; they're compressed slightly inwards. The IPA isn't really equipped for this distinction; Japanese variously uses , [ɯ] or something like [u͍], as on wikipedia. Neither is particularly accurate. Stockholm-Swedish uses [y], [ʉ] and by convention but [y] and [ʉ] are distinguished more by the type of rounding than the place. Apparently. IIRC they're all a bit diphthongal as well, which must mess things up....

Sorry, a bit of a tangent there...

[cybrxkhan]

[ʔʰ], aspirated glottal stop

Is this attested in natlangs?

Is it even possible for the glottal stop to have other consonant qualities, like having it be velarized or labialized or have a creaky voice or whatever?

There are some langs in Africa with a palatalized glottal stop, written <ƴ>, and I think Arabic is commonly analyzed as having a pharyngealized glottal stop. Secondary articulations on the glottal stop are possible; other phonations, as far as I know, aren't.

Also, I think there are some natlangs with a "nasalized glottal stop", which is realized as a glottal stop with nasalization on either the preceding or following vowel; I can't remember which. A quick search of Wikipedia, however, shows only Tundra Nenets, which has a "nasalizable glottal stop", which does... damned if I can make any sense out of that description, but whatever.

That's pretty interesting... I already have a hard enough time being able to distinguish a glottal stop by ear. But I find it pretty interesting, anyways.

[tiramisu]

Tlalysà (in lazy formatting):

Code: Select all

m n
b m͡b t tˤ tʰ d dˤ k kʰ g ʔ
ɸ v ð s z ʃ ʒ ʝ ɣ ħ h
ts
w j
r ɬ lˤ l

i y ɯ u
ɪ ʏ 
ə əʷ
æ œ
ɑ ɒ