zompist bboard

Nortaneous wrote: (yes that means [F_0_h])

I want a recording. Actually, I just want to make that.

Nortaneous wrote:Danish is just insane.

wat

What's hard about Danish pronunciation?

Skomakar'n wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:Danish is just insane.

wat

What's hard about Danish pronunciation?

He said the phonology is insane, not the pronunciation.

Tropylium wrote:• N|u has consonants such as a palato-uvular affricate /cχ/, and contrasts velaric and uvularic clicks, but lacks a /t/ (no, it doesn't have a dental or ejective or aspirated one either).

First impression: the consonant charts just keep coming. Second impression: ejective clicks??

Åge Kruger wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:Danish is just insane.

wat

What's hard about Danish pronunciation?

He said the phonology is insane, not the pronunciation.

What about it is insane? ._.

I'm guessing all those vowels is probably the main reason he wrote it. Not really that weird to us, but look at it cross-linguistically.

Also, I will try to contribute a weird language once I find one.

Skomakar'n wrote:

Åge Kruger wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:Danish is just insane.

wat

What's hard about Danish pronunciation?

He said the phonology is insane, not the pronunciation.

What about it is insane? ._.

73478265457 vowels, pharyngealization as accent, syllabic /D/, full or near-full set of diphthongs with /@_^/ (which isn't that weird for europe but damn skippy it is overall)

Nortaneous wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:

Åge Kruger wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:Danish is just insane.

wat

What's hard about Danish pronunciation?

He said the phonology is insane, not the pronunciation.

What about it is insane? ._.

73478265457 vowels, pharyngealization as accent, syllabic /D/, full or near-full set of diphthongs with /@_^/ (which isn't that weird for europe but damn skippy it is overall)

I don't see the weirdness, but that may be because I live pretty close and know the language.

Tropylium wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:Also: "Some Finnish speakers find it hard to pronounce both 'b' and 'p' in foreign words (e.g. pubi), so they voice (bubi) or devoice (pupi) the entire word." (from Wikipedia)

Ah yep. It gets even worse with more complicated loanwords. "Anegdotes" are commonplace, "gebards" are known for their greit speed, "gebab" is occasionally served, a "pekonia" (funny since it's also the partitiv of "bacon") may be grown on one's windowstill, and even the hypercorrect "Goga Gola" has been attested at least once. One case has even made it into standard Finnish: "biisi" is a loan from "piece of music".

There's also the joke that in theology conferences, everyone in the audience must try to held back laughter whenever Finns have something to say on the topic of "baconism" ([peɪkənisəm]). But yeah, THIS may now be getting off topic.

When I was little, I thought the country was called "Egybti".

Rotuman has massive amounts of grammatical metathesis and deletion, and some weird rules for handling vowel clusters. (/uO/ -> [wa], but /ua/ -> [wO]? the fuck?)

Nortaneous wrote:Rotuman has massive amounts of grammatical metathesis and deletion, and some weird rules for handling vowel clusters. (/uO/ -> [wa], but /ua/ -> [wO]? the fuck?)

that looks pretty cool actually. There's stuff there that conlangers seem to like to do all the time with vowel combinations and what-not.

Since you think Danish has a weird phonology, it would be interesting to see what you think of the way I pronounce my native tounge (Swedish). I think I have less vowels than Danish, though. I'll think about how I do pronounce things, and try to find out which sounds I use. I'll give you the phonology when I get home in a couple of hours.

Documenting your idiolect is a hell of a lot harder than you'd think. I've tried, and I always end up forgetting so much that the description is basically useless.

Nortaneous wrote:Documenting your idiolect is a hell of a lot harder than you'd think. I've tried, and I always end up forgetting so much that the description is basically useless.

I'll still give it a try. It seems like a fun thing to do.
There are at least some things I believe are a bit peculiar, such as /u U U\ y Y 2 &/.

Onondaga doesn't have one really strange feature, but it has a bunch of odd features combined that make it weird imo:

-no labials except /w/

-no voicing contrast on any phonemes, but the only affricate is /dZ/

-/i e { a o/ vowel system, with /e~ u~/. I'd definitely expect /o~/ instead of /u~/ because there is no /u/ and nasal vowels are susceptible to lowering.

-no /l/ or /r/ phonemes.

I am going for the monophthongs at the moment. I have found these so far:

/a: A: A E: E i: I: I o: u: u ? U: U U\: y: Y: Y 2 &: &/

I'll state examples including all of these, composed in the following form:
Standard Swedish orthography - /Standard Swedish pronunciation/ - [my pronunciation] - preferred orthography for me - English translation

galen - /'gA:l@n/ - ['ga:l`In] - galen - crazy
tala - /'tA:la/ - ['tA:l`A] - tala - speak
kall - /kal:/ - [kAl`Ir] - kalder - cold
här - /h{:r/ - [hE:r] - her - here/army
älska - /Elska/ - [El`skA] - elska - to love
i - /i:/ - [i:] - i/í - in
veta - /'ve:ta/ - ['vI:tA] - vita - to wit
sitta - /'sIt:a/ - ['sIt:Sa] - sitja - to sit
någon - /'no:gOn/ - ['no:kYn] - nokun -some/someone
bok - /bu:k/ - ['bu:k] - bok/bók - book
trodde - /'trud:@/ - ['tru?I] - thought/believed
bord - /bu:d`/ - [bU:r] - bord/borð - table/board
kort - /kUt`/ - [kUt`] - kort - card
ko - /ku:/ - [kU\:] - ku/kú - cow
fryser - /fry:s@r/ - [fry:s] - frys/frýs - I freeze
runa - /'rU\:na/ - ['RY:nA] - runa - rune
upp - /U\p:/ - [Yp:] or [Y:p:] - upp - up
börja - /'b2r:ja/ - ['b2r:jA] - byrja - to begin
såg - /so:g/ - [s&:g] - søg - a saw
snön - /sn2n:/ - [sJ&n] - snjø(e)n - the snow

I need help with a particular symbol. Both IPA and X-SAMPA. I often realise /s/ as some kind of mix between [s] and [S]. Like a very weak [S]... Do you know what I mean? In the example with <sitja> up there, it's really supposed to be that symbol and not /S/. Actually goes for the initial /s/ as well, and the final /s/ in <frys> and probably a lot of the others.

There's a lot of weirdness in that area, apparently.

Choctaw only has voice distinctions in /p/ and /l/.
Omaha-Ponca has a velarized lateral approximant with interdental release.
Mohawk has a vowel system of /a e o i @~ u~/.
Lakota has aspirates with velar frication, which only contrast with normal affricates before /e/, and an ejective uvular fricative.

Mbwa wrote:
-no labials except /w/

It has /w/ under the velar POA so I think it's suppose to be /M\/ and not /w/.



Chiricahua has no /w j r l/ but instead has 10 fricatives.

Skomakar'n wrote:såg - /so:g/ - [s&:g] - søg - a saw
snön - /sn2n:/ - [sJ&n] - snjø(e)n - the snow

holy shit, you have [&]? I always figured that didn't really show up in natlangs for whatever reason

I need help with a particular symbol. Both IPA and X-SAMPA. I often realise /s/ as some kind of mix between [s] and [S]. Like a very weak [S]... Do you know what I mean? In the example with <sitja> up there, it's really supposed to be that symbol and not /S/. Actually goes for the initial /s/ as well, and the final /s/ in <frys> and probably a lot of the others.

[s_j]? or maybe it's just laminal: [s_m]

anyway where the fuck did all those [l`] come from?

Vortex wrote:

Mbwa wrote:
-no labials except /w/

It has /w/ under the velar POA so I think it's suppose to be /M\/ and not /w/.

nah, /w/ gets listed under the velar POA all the time

Nortaneous wrote:

Vortex wrote:

Mbwa wrote:
-no labials except /w/

It has /w/ under the velar POA so I think it's suppose to be /M\/ and not /w/.

nah, /w/ gets listed under the velar POA all the time

True...also /ɰ/ without /w/ is incredibly weird. Other than the vowels though this doesn't look strange to me.

Nortaneous wrote:

Vortex wrote:

Mbwa wrote:
-no labials except /w/

It has /w/ under the velar POA so I think it's suppose to be /M\/ and not /w/.

nah, /w/ gets listed under the velar POA all the time

I'm inclined to believe it's /M\/ since other native american languages in the area have /M\/ instead /w/ even with having the bilabial POV.

Colzie wrote:True...also /ɰ/ without /w/ is incredibly weird.

Not really.

Nortaneous wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:såg - /so:g/ - [s&:g] - søg - a saw
snön - /sn2n:/ - [sJ&n] - snjø(e)n - the snow

holy shit, you have [&]? I always figured that didn't really show up in natlangs for whatever reason

Unless this symbol doesn't represent the sound I think it does, I do. I'll record it later.

Nortaneous wrote:

I need help with a particular symbol. Both IPA and X-SAMPA. I often realise /s/ as some kind of mix between [s] and [S]. Like a very weak [S]... Do you know what I mean? In the example with <sitja> up there, it's really supposed to be that symbol and not /S/. Actually goes for the initial /s/ as well, and the final /s/ in <frys> and probably a lot of the others.

[s_j]? or maybe it's just laminal: [s_m]

What about IPA?

Nortaneous wrote:anyway where the fuck did all those [l`] come from?

As far as I know, not one single l coming out of my mouth isn't retroflex. I am pretty sure they all are.

Skomakar'n wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:

Skomakar'n wrote:såg - /so:g/ - [s&:g] - søg - a saw
snön - /sn2n:/ - [sJ&n] - snjø(e)n - the snow

holy shit, you have [&]? I always figured that didn't really show up in natlangs for whatever reason

Unless this symbol doesn't represent the sound I think it does, I do. I'll record it later.

It's a low front rounded vowel. (rounded /a/)

Nortaneous wrote:

I need help with a particular symbol. Both IPA and X-SAMPA. I often realise /s/ as some kind of mix between [s] and [S]. Like a very weak [S]... Do you know what I mean? In the example with <sitja> up there, it's really supposed to be that symbol and not /S/. Actually goes for the initial /s/ as well, and the final /s/ in <frys> and probably a lot of the others.

[s_j]? or maybe it's just laminal: [s_m]

What about IPA?

http://conlanger.com/xipa.html (for some reason, this doesn't take <_j>; you have to use <'> instead, and yeah, that's valid X-SAMPA)

sʲ or s̻

Nortaneous wrote:anyway where the fuck did all those [l`] come from?

As far as I know, not one single l coming out of my mouth isn't retroflex. I am pretty sure they all are.

awesome

Nortaneous wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:anyway where the fuck did all those [l`] come from?

As far as I know, not one single l coming out of my mouth isn't retroflex. I am pretty sure they all are.

awesome

Skomakar'n, this is a speech impediment, not an idiolect. Visit a speech pedagog.