zompist bboard

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE ONLY - see Ephemera
It is currently Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:45 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Gartul, p.3- Phonology
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:43 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:03 pm
Posts: 13
Jeez. I hated this.

It’s necessary, yeah, but the phonology just seemed like SO MUCH WORK. Looking at the IPA chart, all the symbols.....................learning what phonology IS.....

I stuck pretty close to English for the phonology at first then decided to throw in a few extra sounds for the heck of it. Now, please note- just because a sound isn’t on this post doesn’t mean Gartul doesn’t have that sound. The English sound for ‘ay’ is still in the phonology, it just doesn’t have an alphabetical symbol. So all these IPA symbols are just the ones representing those which will have an alphabetical symbol.

Another gripe I had with the phonology was a result of my idiocy and beginner’s thought. I had an alphabet drafted for Gartul (the native alphabet and Latin alphabet can be used interchangeably: for world-building purposes I decided that the upper-class/middle class people would write in the native alphabet and the lower class would write in the Latin alphabet. The upper-class snobs would always detest the ‘vulgar’ (nyeate) Latin alphabet), then I realized that you can’t have an alphabet without a phonology, because alphabetical symbols represented sounds in the language and if I didn’t have sounds, I had no alphabet. Yay. So an alphabet will be coming soon.

Again, I stuck close to English for this, but threw in a few extra sounds for fun. Please critique me on this, as I hated doing this so I didn’t put in a lot of effort. Thanks.


Consonants

NASALS- n, ɳ, ɲ, m
LABIALS- p, b
FRICATIVES- s, z, ʃ, v, f, χ, h
TRILLS- r
APPROXIMANTS- j, l
PLOSIVES- t, d, g, ɟ
AFFRICATES- t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ
OTHERS- W (voiced labial-velar approximant)

VOWELS

CLOSE- i, u
NEAR-CLOSE- ɪ, ʊ
NEAR-OPEN- ɐ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:10 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:18 pm
Posts: 11
I don't know how natural you wanted this to be, or if there's something significant about the speakers that would change significantly how the phonology would manifest. Some points, in no particular order:

1. Vowels
Generally, a 5-vowel system will use /i e a o u/. Indeed, often the /i/ and /u/ will be simplified to [ɪ] and [ʊ], at least as I understand it. /ɐ/, I think, is fine, though others might simplify it or specify it as /a/ instead.
Which is all to say, I don't think a 5-vowel system with /i/, /u/, /ɪ/, and /ʊ/ is very realistic.

2. Layout
It looks like you're starting to get the hang of the phonetic chart. However, /p/ and /b/ are better categorized as plosives, rather than specifically as labials. They are labials, but they're labial plosives, and usually grouped with the other plosives. Similarly, I understand it's custom to group /w/ with the rest of the approximates. (I'd also group /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ with the plosives, but that's more a personal preference that could be debated.)

3. Plosives
The main issue here is /g/ and /ɉ/. As this will show, if a language is missing any plosives in the back (where /g/ hangs out), generally the one it'll be missing is /g/, rather than /k/. Personallly, if you're gonna put a palatal plosive in, I'd have put /c/ in over /ɉ/, (or better yet, both) but I don't know enough about palatals to really judge here.

4. Nasals
I'm a bit confused as to what a retroflex nasal is doing here, particularly when you also have /ɲ/.

5. Phonology vs Alphabet
As I understand it, it's generally accepted to list out all a language's phonemes in its phonology, not just those with a dedicated letter (see English /θ/ and /ð/), because alphabets tend to only imperfectly reflect all the sounds in a language -- especially a couple hundred years after the alphabet's adoption. It felt like you were implying that you left out phonemes without a dedicated letter, but this would give an imperfect image of what the phonology actually looks like. For example, you leave out all your diphthongs (like English /aɪ/), though this would be a perfectly valid place to list them out.

Other than that, looks like a good start! It is kinda Englishy, but based on your other posts, it looks like you've managed to make something unique out of it. The hardest part about phonology is learning it all and figuring out how everything works -- the fun part comes after when all your friends keep looking at you weird for making strange noises with your mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:20 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
vergil wrote:
2. Layout
It looks like you're starting to get the hang of the phonetic chart. However, /p/ and /b/ are better categorized as plosives, rather than specifically as labials. They are labials, but they're labial plosives, and usually grouped with the other plosives. Similarly, I understand it's custom to group /w/ with the rest of the approximates. (I'd also group /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ with the plosives, but that's more a personal preference that could be debated.)


More generally, "labial" is a place of articulation, which runs perpendicular to manner of articulation, which is how you've otherwise been grouping your consonants (which is perfectly fine), and thereby the should by rights fit into the plosives category. So by the same logic /w/ should go with the approximants.

With the affricates though it's no cut and dried, and is clearly more language- and analysis-dependent, like for some languages the affricates clearly pattern with the plosives while for others they do not (though in this case I'd probably agree with the former interpretation).

Quote:
3. Plosives
The main issue here is /g/ and /ɉ/. As this will show, if a language is missing any plosives in the back (where /g/ hangs out), generally the one it'll be missing is /g/, rather than /k/. Personallly, if you're gonna put a palatal plosive in, I'd have put /c/ in over /ɉ/, (or better yet, both) but I don't know enough about palatals to really judge here.


Actually there are definitely cases where the voiced palatal is the only one (Classical Arabic says hi).

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:37 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:18 pm
Posts: 11
Quote:
Quote:
3. Plosives
The main issue here is /g/ and /ɉ/. As this will show, if a language is missing any plosives in the back (where /g/ hangs out), generally the one it'll be missing is /g/, rather than /k/. Personallly, if you're gonna put a palatal plosive in, I'd have put /c/ in over /ɉ/, (or better yet, both) but I don't know enough about palatals to really judge here.


Actually there are definitely cases where the voiced palatal is the only one (Classical Arabic says hi).


Well then, in that case, carry on!


Last edited by vergil on Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:49 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:03 pm
Posts: 13
1. Vowels
Generally, a 5-vowel system will use /i e a o u/. Indeed, often the /i/ and /u/ will be simplified to [ɪ] and [ʊ], at least as I understand it. /ɐ/, I think, is fine, though others might simplify it or specify it as /a/ instead.
Which is all to say, I don't think a 5-vowel system with /i/, /u/, /ɪ/, and /ʊ/ is very realistic.

I don’t entirely know what you mean by ‘realistic.’ I tried to model it after the English vowel system, just variants on a, e, I, o, and u.

4. Nasals
I'm a bit confused as to what a retroflex nasal is doing here, particularly when you also have /ɲ/.

It’s there... because I put it there? The world building here is very minimal. I just wanted to put it there.

5. Phonology vs Alphabet
As I understand it, it's generally accepted to list out all a language's phonemes in its phonology, not just those with a dedicated letter (see English /θ/ and /ð/), because alphabets tend to only imperfectly reflect all the sounds in a language -- especially a couple hundred years after the alphabet's adoption. It felt like you were implying that you left out phonemes without a dedicated letter, but this would give an imperfect image of what the phonology actually looks like. For example, you leave out all your diphthongs (like English /aɪ/), though this would be a perfectly valid place to list them out.

I will work on that, thanks for telling me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:31 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 1228
Location: Scattered disc
vergil wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
3. Plosives
The main issue here is /g/ and /ɉ/. As this will show, if a language is missing any plosives in the back (where /g/ hangs out), generally the one it'll be missing is /g/, rather than /k/. Personallly, if you're gonna put a palatal plosive in, I'd have put /c/ in over /ɉ/, (or better yet, both) but I don't know enough about palatals to really judge here.

Actually there are definitely cases where the voiced palatal is the only one (Classical Arabic says hi).

Well then, in that case, carry on!
Worth noting, though, that the reason Arabic has phonemic /ɟ/ without a voiceless version is because it got that /ɟ/ from an earlier /g/, which is why it also has /k/ without /g/. Having *both* of the voiced members and neither of the voiceless would be quite a bit more unusual. Even so, it's not completely out of sight .... Mongolian has some odd stop setup that looks a lot like this, though I dont know what its allophones are.

I'd say that if you like having /g ɟ/ without /k c/, go for it, but it is definitely unusual and I would expect, for example, if there are clusters like /tg/ that they would be pronounced as [tk].

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:56 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:18 pm
Posts: 11
Universeal12 wrote:
I don’t entirely know what you mean by ‘realistic.’ I tried to model it after the English vowel system, just variants on a, e, I, o, and u.


You mean the English alphabet vowels, or the English phonological vowels? Because the two are very different.

This is a really good summary of the vowel systems of the world (from this very forum, even :D) if you're interested in "realistic" sytems -- that is, ones that often crop up in natural languages.

If you're not interested in a realistic phonology, then hopefully it can still give you some ideas about all the crazy stuff you can do with vowels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:56 am 
Sanci
Sanci
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:48 pm
Posts: 65
Location: The depths of the hyperreals
Universeal12 wrote:
I don’t entirely know what you mean by ‘realistic.’ I tried to model it after the English vowel system, just variants on a, e, I, o, and u.

Simply put, this would very much surprise me if I saw it in a natural language: /i/ and /ɪ/ sound very similar, so, to make it easier to tell words apart, /ɪ/ would probably shift: it could go to /ə/, /e/ or /ɨ/, or they could merge. The same goes for /u/ and /ʊ/. If a natural language has two or more similar sounds, and a gap nearby, one of the sounds will generally shift, or the two sounds will merge.

If this was ever a languages vowel inventory, I would expect something like /i e a o u/ to come from it. Otherwise, if you wanted a more interesting 5-vowel system, /i a u ɨ ə/ would be cool and possible.

Universeal12 wrote:
It’s there... because I put it there? The world building here is very minimal. I just wanted to put it there.

Again, it's unrealistic. I did the same thing in my first conlangs (I had a random implosive, one aspirated affricate in a language with a voicing distinction etc), but it wouldn't happen in a real language on Earth. Consonants tend to come in series. Think about English: in its simplest form, you could say it has labial, alveolar, palatal/post-alveolar, velar and glottal manners of articulation. For each of these (apart from glottal, because its in the throat not the mouth), there are two stops (or affricates for post-alveolar), two fricatives, a nasal and an approximant. Now, we get rid of the velar fricatives and the palatal nasal, and add /l/ and the dental fricatives, and you're done.
Except for /l/, which is usually an exception, all of the sounds come in a series - similarly, you could consider adding retroflex stops, and maybe /k/ and /c/, just to even out your inventory.

_________________
Bish Bash Rabadash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 5:57 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:03 pm
Posts: 13
If this was ever a languages vowel inventory, I would expect something like /i e a o u/ to come from it. Otherwise, if you wanted a more interesting 5-vowel system, /i a u ɨ ə/ would be cool and possible.

Thanks, that actually is pretty good.


you could consider adding retroflex stops, and maybe /k/ and /c/, just to even out your inventory.

I’d add k, but why c? C seems unnecessary.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:28 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2144
Location: Britannia
Btw, you might want to start using the
Code:
[quote][/quote]
tags to mark the text you're quoting. You can also quote an entire post by clicking the 'quote' button next to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:29 pm 
Sanci
Sanci
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:48 pm
Posts: 65
Location: The depths of the hyperreals
Universeal12 wrote:
I’d add k, but why c? C seems unnecessary.


If you have voicing distinctions in /p/vs/b/, /t/vs/d/ and /k/vs/g/ etc. , it kinda makes sense to have /c/vs/ɟ/ as well. Again, its not necessary, and it would give the phonology an interesting flavour if it wasn't there.

That would leave your consonant inventory (with non-confirmed phonemes in brackets) as:

/p b t d tʃ dʒ (ʈ ɖ c) ɟ k g/
/m n ɳ ɲ/
/f v s z ʃ x h/
/w r l j/

Quite a nice inventory for a first language!

_________________
Bish Bash Rabadash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:56 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
"The mid vowels were probably really close to the high vowels" is at least a possible position to take for the reconstruction of Proto-Japonic -- there are lots of raising chain shifts and lots of mergers of the mid vowels into the high vowels in Japonic, but the details aren't quite the same so the six-vowel system has to be projected back to PJ

Like, Miyako has your typical consonantalization chain shift (or "frication", but you also get syllabic nasals), which is what it looks like when the mid vowels push the high vowels even higher (so PJ *e *o > Miyako i u, PJ *i *u have various reflexes including s=, f=, m=, n=, v=; cf. that dialect of Chinese where ie i > i z=), but Japanese merges *e *o into /i u/ and develops new /e o/ from diphthongs, and Okinawan (I think) develops more *e *o from diphthongs in a similar way to Japanese and _then_ merges *e *o into /i u/ (and then develops some new /e: o:/)

(in Miyako *i *u probably actually 'fricated' everywhere, but some of the voiced fricated vowels were later lost -- IIRC, PJ *du > Oogami /kM/, paralleling *tu > /ks=/. there are probably some more Miyako dialects that preserve dz= or something, idk)

I don't think /a @ i 1 u/ is attested anywhere (but I'm probably wrong), but you can definitely do /a e i 1 u/ (Miyako) or /a o i 1 u/ (what is it, some Uto-Aztecan maybe?)

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 5:54 pm 
Niš
Niš

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:03 pm
Posts: 13
Hello all!

Here's an update on the phonology, as I have learned, is a bit rough.

VOWEL SYSTEM-

CLOSE- i, u
CLOSE-MID- e
MID- ə
NEAR-OPEN- a

CONSONANTS

I'm adding 'k.'

DIPTHONGS

ia (as in 'yah')
ai (as in 'buy')
ue (as in 'weh')
uə (like an umlauted o)
ua (as in 'wah')
au ('ow)

Okay, thanks. I'm trying to get an alphabet uploaded, but it always says that the 'image is too big...'


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:15 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1998
Location: suburbs of Mrin
You could upload it on a hosting site or Google Docs and post a link

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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