zompist bboard

_________________
"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?”

Four vowel systems are very common .... it's just that it's usually /a i u ə/, so it's balanced. /a i u ə/ ,might even be the most common system in the entire world.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:

Nah, that would be five-vowel.

Not nearly as strange as having no back rounded vowels...

_________________
"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?”

Could [e̞ʋ~ᴇʋ ɑʋ] be considered vowels since [ʋ] takes [w]'s place? If so, would they be rounded or unrounded?

Is [χ] more naturally an allophone of /x/ or /h/? Currently, the relationship is [x→χ] adjacent to /ɑ ⱺ/ regardless of syllable coda/mora or another uvular in the same syllable.

It definitely makes more sense to me for [x] to be an allophone of /x/ than of /h/. (Even if the symbols used for phonemes are arbitrary anyway).

This looks like a display issue....some phones can't display the Greek chi symbol so it just appears as a simple x.

No comment/opinion on the question.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:

I'm on a desktop computer, and I don't see any chi's anywhere on this page.

_________________
"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?”

Aha, it is for me, too, if I use Chrome instead of Mozilla!

You can have syllabic labiodental approximant / labiodentalized [u] as a vowel, e.g. Nias. If there are sequences that behave phonologically like diphthongs (what does this mean for your language?) but are phonetically realized as a vowel followed by a labiodental approximant, I would expect /u/ to also be labiodentalized but these sequences could be analyzable as diphthongs.

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

Would [y ɔ] be believable transcriptions of [ᴇʋ ɑʋ] as vowels, or would [ᴇʋ ɑʋ] need different transcriptions?

Is [m n→ɴ] adjacent to back vowels a likely assimilation?

Are [pʃ bʒ] better described as bilabial-postalveolar ([p̱ʃ ḇʒ]) or labiodental-postalveolar ([p̪ʃ b̪ʒ])?