Ongoing sound change?
Ongoing sound change?
My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Is that true for anybody else?
Is that true for anybody else?
Re: Ongoing sound change?
It's false for me, but I am evolving initial [ts] instead of "it's". e.g. 'tsmy life, dad, fuck off!'
Is that true for anybody else?
Is that true for anybody else?
- Aurora Rossa
- Smeric
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:46 am
- Location: The vendée of America
- Contact:
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Where do you live, Dhokarena?
"There was a particular car I soon came to think of as distinctly St. Louis-ish: a gigantic white S.U.V. with a W. bumper sticker on it for George W. Bush."
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I don't have that.dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Is that true for anybody else?
But I do have this. And a bunch of other, non-Englishy initial clusters like it.cromulant wrote:It's false for me, but I am evolving initial [ts] instead of "it's". e.g. 'tsmy life, dad, fuck off!'
Is that true for anybody else?
I also have lenition of and [ɡ] to [β̞] and [ɰ] in some circumstances. For instance, laboratory and wiggle are [ˈlæβ̞ɹətɔɹi] and [ˈwɪɰl̩] but abort and ago are [əˈb̥ɔɹt̚] and [əˈɡ̥ʌʊ].
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I have an ongoing change that added a new affricate into me language: a voicing assimilation [ts] > [dz]\ __Cv; where Cv is voiced obstruent.
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I have the first stages of the NCVS, so:
stressed /æ/ > [ɛə̯]
unstressed /æ/ > [ɛ]
/ɜ/ > [ʌ]
/ɑ/ > [a]
I lentiate intervocalic /b/ and /g/ into [β] and [ɣ]
Intervocalic unstressed onset /p k/ >
Coda /st sts/ and /zd zdz/ > /sː/ and /zː/
/str/, /tr/, and /dr/ > /ʃr/, /ʧr/, and /ʤr/
/k/ and /ɡ/ are realized as uvular when adjacent to /r/
stressed /æ/ > [ɛə̯]
unstressed /æ/ > [ɛ]
/ɜ/ > [ʌ]
/ɑ/ > [a]
I lentiate intervocalic /b/ and /g/ into [β] and [ɣ]
Intervocalic unstressed onset /p k/ >
Coda /st sts/ and /zd zdz/ > /sː/ and /zː/
/str/, /tr/, and /dr/ > /ʃr/, /ʧr/, and /ʤr/
/k/ and /ɡ/ are realized as uvular when adjacent to /r/
Last edited by TaylorS on Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I have the /ts/ prefix, but my /tʃ dʒ/ is just fine and stable. Well, except that I do them postalveolar, but until recently I thought that was the norm
I did notice today when I said /θæŋks/ as [tæŋks], not to be confused with [thæŋks], those things that move around with massive guns. After some more experiments, I may be able to put down /θ/ > [t] / #_ in my list of ideo-allophones.
EDIT: whoah, /str/ > [ʃr]? I have /tr dr/ > [tʃr dʒr], but not that first one. How did that even develop? I guess I shouldn't whine, considering my (un)aspiration crap.
I did notice today when I said /θæŋks/ as [tæŋks], not to be confused with [thæŋks], those things that move around with massive guns. After some more experiments, I may be able to put down /θ/ > [t] / #_ in my list of ideo-allophones.
EDIT: whoah, /str/ > [ʃr]? I have /tr dr/ > [tʃr dʒr], but not that first one. How did that even develop? I guess I shouldn't whine, considering my (un)aspiration crap.
My Conlang Site which pretty much only has Tayéin.
Still under construction, but at least I did some photoshop.
Still under construction, but at least I did some photoshop.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I have fricativation of [tʃ] and [dʒ] too, in casual speech. For me it happens about even for both. I'm pretty sure I pronounce both [ɪ] and [ə] as [ɛ] because in rapid casual speech I have [ɛn] for "an" and [ɛbaut] for "about", [ɛt] for "it", [ɛs] for "is", but oddly [ɪs] for "it's".dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Is that true for anybody else?
That last example goes into something else I've noticed in my casual speech, [ts] changes [s] in contractions...for me "what's" is [wʌs], "that's" is [ðæs] , and "let's" is [lɛs].
Also, my speech is nasalization city so a good amount of strangers find me hard to understand......helps me with the French and Portuguese though!
Tjalehu ge frulehu, tjea ale stjindamihu? Dime sfraiaknanmi.
Economic: -7.33
Social: 0.31
Economic: -7.33
Social: 0.31
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Anyone else have /o/ [ɤ] in certain environments? (I think after labiodentals and /r/)
[ts]~[s], although initial /s/ seems to vary with [ts] sometimes for me.cromulant wrote:It's false for me, but I am evolving initial [ts] instead of "it's". e.g. 'tsmy life, dad, fuck off!'
Is that true for anybody else?
Is it really alveolar, or is it interdental?Okuno wrote:I did notice today when I said /θæŋks/ as [tæŋks], not to be confused with [thæŋks], those things that move around with massive guns. After some more experiments, I may be able to put down /θ/ > [t] / #_ in my list of ideo-allophones.
[ʃtr], then weird lenition shit in /st/ clusters.EDIT: whoah, /str/ > [ʃr]? I have /tr dr/ > [tʃr dʒr], but not that first one. How did that even develop? I guess I shouldn't whine, considering my (un)aspiration crap.
This can happen for me also, as can dropping of initial /ð/.Amuere wrote:That last example goes into something else I've noticed in my casual speech, [ts] changes [s] in contractions...for me "what's" is [wʌs], "that's" is [ðæs] , and "let's" is [lɛs].
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
in my English:
-ts-prefix for it's
-[ts] > [s] in that's, let's, it's, what's
-elision of initial /ð/
-/ʊ/ is generally [ɤ] (this is one the few vowels that seems to stay in about the same spot no matter who I'm around)
-intervocalic unstressed onset /k/ > [g]
-/θ/ is occasionally [f], especially finally
-I've noticed I sometimes say [sʷɪm] for swim
-final plosives are often ejectives
-near-affrication of aspirated plosives
-ts-prefix for it's
-[ts] > [s] in that's, let's, it's, what's
-elision of initial /ð/
-/ʊ/ is generally [ɤ] (this is one the few vowels that seems to stay in about the same spot no matter who I'm around)
-intervocalic unstressed onset /k/ > [g]
-/θ/ is occasionally [f], especially finally
-I've noticed I sometimes say [sʷɪm] for swim
-final plosives are often ejectives
-near-affrication of aspirated plosives
Ascima mresa óscsma sáca psta numar cemea.
Cemea tae neasc ctá ms co ísbas Ascima.
Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
The Pittsburgh area; I'll try and see if my friends have that change today, but in the meantime, let's wait for Bristel to show up.Eddy wrote:Where do you live, Dhokarena?
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Your development would be another example for voiced affricates de-affricating faster than unvoiced affricates. A classical example for that development is Slavic - Balto-Slavic *k before front vowel became /t_S/ or /t_C/ in the Modern Slavic languages, while *g in the same position became /Z/.dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
God there is so much I could go over here, yet again, but I don't want to turn this into a Travis's Weird Dialect thread.*
Now, that said, one thing that one ought to always remember with these kinds of things is to beware false newness, the bane of any looking for non-standard forms in human languages. Just because something is nonstandard as a form does not mean, by any means, that it is necessarily new.
* I should probably just write a grammar of it, at least relative to Standard English, so I can just drop a link to a PDF or a Wiki here when this kind of thread inevitably pops up...
Now, that said, one thing that one ought to always remember with these kinds of things is to beware false newness, the bane of any looking for non-standard forms in human languages. Just because something is nonstandard as a form does not mean, by any means, that it is necessarily new.
* I should probably just write a grammar of it, at least relative to Standard English, so I can just drop a link to a PDF or a Wiki here when this kind of thread inevitably pops up...
Last edited by Travis B. on Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
That does, in another way, remind me of how /dʒ/ in at least some dialects in the Upper Midwest has become unconditionally devoiced, so as to always contrast with /tʃ/ only based on aspiration, time stopped, strength of release, preglottalization, (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length, and sometimes is further merged than that, e.g. only having preglottalization and (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length distinguish the two. This is even though said dialects usually at least maintain some sort of conditional or optional voicing of all other lenis plosives, with voicing being lost altogether only in the case of /dʒ/.hwhatting wrote:Your development would be another example for voiced affricates de-affricating faster than unvoiced affricates. A classical example for that development is Slavic - Balto-Slavic *k before front vowel became /t_S/ or /t_C/ in the Modern Slavic languages, while *g in the same position became /Z/.dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
- Aurora Rossa
- Smeric
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:46 am
- Location: The vendée of America
- Contact:
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I see then. Hasn't that area historically had something of a unique dialect?dhokarena56 wrote:The Pittsburgh area; I'll try and see if my friends have that change today, but in the meantime, let's wait for Bristel to show up.Eddy wrote:Where do you live, Dhokarena?
"There was a particular car I soon came to think of as distinctly St. Louis-ish: a gigantic white S.U.V. with a W. bumper sticker on it for George W. Bush."
Re: Ongoing sound change?
[stɹˤ] > [sʧɹˤ] > [ʃʧɹˤ] > [ʃɹˤ]Okuno wrote:I have the /ts/ prefix, but my /tʃ dʒ/ is just fine and stable. Well, except that I do them postalveolar, but until recently I thought that was the norm
I did notice today when I said /θæŋks/ as [tæŋks], not to be confused with [thæŋks], those things that move around with massive guns. After some more experiments, I may be able to put down /θ/ > [t] / #_ in my list of ideo-allophones.
EDIT: whoah, /str/ > [ʃr]? I have /tr dr/ > [tʃr dʒr], but not that first one. How did that even develop? I guess I shouldn't whine, considering my (un)aspiration crap.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
What's up > wassap?Amuere wrote:I have fricativation of [tʃ] and [dʒ] too, in casual speech. For me it happens about even for both. I'm pretty sure I pronounce both [ɪ] and [ə] as [ɛ] because in rapid casual speech I have [ɛn] for "an" and [ɛbaut] for "about", [ɛt] for "it", [ɛs] for "is", but oddly [ɪs] for "it's".dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Is that true for anybody else?
That last example goes into something else I've noticed in my casual speech, [ts] changes [s] in contractions...for me "what's" is [wʌs], "that's" is [ðæs] , and "let's" is [lɛs].
Also, my speech is nasalization city so a good amount of strangers find me hard to understand......helps me with the French and Portuguese though!
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Hmm, I generally just have [sɐp].
Ascima mresa óscsma sáca psta numar cemea.
Cemea tae neasc ctá ms co ísbas Ascima.
Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho. Carho.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Yeah, final /dʒ/ is always devoiced for me, so "garbage" is [ˈɡ̥ɑʁˤbɨ̞ʧ]Travis B. wrote:That does, in another way, remind me of how /dʒ/ in at least some dialects in the Upper Midwest has become unconditionally devoiced, so as to always contrast with /tʃ/ only based on aspiration, time stopped, strength of release, preglottalization, (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length, and sometimes is further merged than that, e.g. only having preglottalization and (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length distinguish the two. This is even though said dialects usually at least maintain some sort of conditional or optional voicing of all other lenis plosives, with voicing being lost altogether only in the case of /dʒ/.hwhatting wrote:Your development would be another example for voiced affricates de-affricating faster than unvoiced affricates. A classical example for that development is Slavic - Balto-Slavic *k before front vowel became /t_S/ or /t_C/ in the Modern Slavic languages, while *g in the same position became /Z/.dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Lol, pretty much, but like Areo said I usually shorten it to just "sup".TaylorS wrote:What's up > wassap?Amuere wrote:I have fricativation of [tʃ] and [dʒ] too, in casual speech. For me it happens about even for both. I'm pretty sure I pronounce both [ɪ] and [ə] as [ɛ] because in rapid casual speech I have [ɛn] for "an" and [ɛbaut] for "about", [ɛt] for "it", [ɛs] for "is", but oddly [ɪs] for "it's".dhokarena56 wrote:My (GenAm, more or less) affricates tʃ and dʒ are turning into ʃ and ʒ, respectively. tʃ>ʃ is far less common in my speech, but I very rarely have dʒ anymore- it's all fricativised.
Is that true for anybody else?
That last example goes into something else I've noticed in my casual speech, [ts] changes [s] in contractions...for me "what's" is [wʌs], "that's" is [ðæs] , and "let's" is [lɛs].
Also, my speech is nasalization city so a good amount of strangers find me hard to understand......helps me with the French and Portuguese though!
Tjalehu ge frulehu, tjea ale stjindamihu? Dime sfraiaknanmi.
Economic: -7.33
Social: 0.31
Economic: -7.33
Social: 0.31
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I actually was not merely referring to final devoicing but rather unconditional devoicing in all positions. (I do have final fortition like you describe there in addition, but that is a matter of actually being realized like a fortis consonant finally aside from not affecting vowel length and not gaining preglottalization.)TaylorS wrote:Yeah, final /dʒ/ is always devoiced for me, so "garbage" is [ˈɡ̥ɑʁˤbɨ̞ʧ]Travis B. wrote:That does, in another way, remind me of how /dʒ/ in at least some dialects in the Upper Midwest has become unconditionally devoiced, so as to always contrast with /tʃ/ only based on aspiration, time stopped, strength of release, preglottalization, (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length, and sometimes is further merged than that, e.g. only having preglottalization and (in many but not all dialects) preceding vowel length distinguish the two. This is even though said dialects usually at least maintain some sort of conditional or optional voicing of all other lenis plosives, with voicing being lost altogether only in the case of /dʒ/.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Re: Ongoing sound change?
On that note, as this thread does seem to be slowing down, I might as well post interesting stuff that I've found more recently IMD anyways now.
Probably the most interesting bit I have found recently is that specifically everyday speech, there is a lenition without neither voicing nor frication of unstressed intervocalic /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ in unstressed intervocalic positions that seems to actually be far more consistent than I had previously assumed. This combines with that in the same register /b/, /dʒ/, and /ɡ/ are also voiceless lenis in this same position, likewise far more consistently than I had previously assumed. Also, /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ do not induce preglottalization here either.
The result is essentially a pure vowel length contrast between /b/, /dʒ/, and /ɡ/ and /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ here in everyday speech, to the point that in a narrow analysis that treated vowel length, except in morpheme-final syllables without obstruents in their coda, as phonemic would likewise treat these two sets as merging in morpheme-medial unstressed intervocalic positions.
I would still probably not use such an analysis, though, as high registers much more clearly distinguish the two sets in that position, both through the voicing of the lenis set and through less lenition of the fortis set.
(I should note that this does vary heavily depending on the exact dialect in use, e.g. my ex seems to have far less of this than people from back in the suburb where I grew up, where I heard a lot of this when I listened for it.)
On another note, one thing I noticed is that final /n/ tends to be elided more than I had thought before my dialect; it had seemed to be primarily an intervocalic thing, but rather from paying attention to things closely since then, it seems to be sporadically to very frequently, depending on register, elided finally regardless of what follows it or even utterance-finally. My parents, for instance, do seem to not infrequently drop it finally, albeit not as much as I catch myself doing. It does seem to be somewhat lexicalized, as this seems to happen much more with grammar words and with effectively-grammatical constructions than with content words, as far as I have noticed so far. (I for instance drop final /n/ extremely frequently for can, in, than, kind, and like compared to normal content words.)
Probably the most interesting bit I have found recently is that specifically everyday speech, there is a lenition without neither voicing nor frication of unstressed intervocalic /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ in unstressed intervocalic positions that seems to actually be far more consistent than I had previously assumed. This combines with that in the same register /b/, /dʒ/, and /ɡ/ are also voiceless lenis in this same position, likewise far more consistently than I had previously assumed. Also, /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ do not induce preglottalization here either.
The result is essentially a pure vowel length contrast between /b/, /dʒ/, and /ɡ/ and /p/, /tʃ/, and /k/ here in everyday speech, to the point that in a narrow analysis that treated vowel length, except in morpheme-final syllables without obstruents in their coda, as phonemic would likewise treat these two sets as merging in morpheme-medial unstressed intervocalic positions.
I would still probably not use such an analysis, though, as high registers much more clearly distinguish the two sets in that position, both through the voicing of the lenis set and through less lenition of the fortis set.
(I should note that this does vary heavily depending on the exact dialect in use, e.g. my ex seems to have far less of this than people from back in the suburb where I grew up, where I heard a lot of this when I listened for it.)
On another note, one thing I noticed is that final /n/ tends to be elided more than I had thought before my dialect; it had seemed to be primarily an intervocalic thing, but rather from paying attention to things closely since then, it seems to be sporadically to very frequently, depending on register, elided finally regardless of what follows it or even utterance-finally. My parents, for instance, do seem to not infrequently drop it finally, albeit not as much as I catch myself doing. It does seem to be somewhat lexicalized, as this seems to happen much more with grammar words and with effectively-grammatical constructions than with content words, as far as I have noticed so far. (I for instance drop final /n/ extremely frequently for can, in, than, kind, and like compared to normal content words.)
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
- roninbodhisattva
- Avisaru
- Posts: 568
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:50 pm
- Location: California
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Do you have positive anymore? I find that to be a really exciting thing about Pittsburgh.dhokarena56 wrote:The Pittsburgh area; I'll try and see if my friends have that change today, but in the meantime, let's wait for Bristel to show up.Eddy wrote:Where do you live, Dhokarena?
-
- Smeric
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Miracle, Inc. Headquarters
- Contact:
Re: Ongoing sound change?
Nooo, I refuse to show up when mentioned.dhokarena56 wrote:The Pittsburgh area; I'll try and see if my friends have that change today, but in the meantime, let's wait for Bristel to show up.Eddy wrote:Where do you live, Dhokarena?
Wait...
Well, I wasn't born in Picksbird, so I only know of the most heinous accent markers here.
The most obvious would be [dɑn.tɑn] for <downtown>. So, I guess some of the vowels have coalesced.
[bɹ̠ˤʷɪs.təɫ]
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Re: Ongoing sound change?
I have positive "anymore" in a restricted range, mostly questions.roninbodhisattva wrote:Do you have positive anymore? I find that to be a really exciting thing about Pittsburgh.dhokarena56 wrote:The Pittsburgh area; I'll try and see if my friends have that change today, but in the meantime, let's wait for Bristel to show up.Eddy wrote:Where do you live, Dhokarena?
"Does he do that anymore?"