Substantial postings about constructed languages and constructed worlds in general. Good place to mention your own or evaluate someone else's. Put quick questions in C&C Quickies instead.
I see no problem with that. I have seen weirder things. What you ask for is essentially two consonants meeting in the middle.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
And as we are at such things as clusters and changing POAs:
Do you think /c/ > /tk/ makes sense?
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
I see no problem with that. I have seen weirder things. What you ask for is essentially two consonants meeting in the middle.
I'd think "meeting in the middle" would give you something more like /c/. Actually, if this is plausible, it's probably more like the /k/ retracts the /t/ to /ʈ/.
Clıck wrote:
WeepingElf wrote:And as we are at such things as clusters and changing POAs:
Do you think /c/ > /tk/ makes sense?
It looks a bit far-fetched at first glance, but possible.
Is pʰ tʰ kʰ → ɸ θ x → w j h / C_ plausible?
In what environment do you want /c/ > /tk/? (You also might consider expanding that to something like /c/ > /kʲ/ > /kt/ > /tk/)
Hmm... I'd think perhaps to add a /ɸ/ > /β/ and /θ/ > /ð/ or something first... but otherwise I don't see why not.
ObsequiousNewt wrote:In what environment do you want /c/ > /tk/?
In all environments. The idea is that a whole series of palatal obstruents disappears by becoming alveolar/velar clusters, possibly under the influence of an adstratum language that has such clusters.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Not sure about "all environments", but at least in #_V and V_V positions c > kʲ > kt > tk seems possible, like ON mentioned above. Didn't something similar (kj > kt IIRC) happen somewhere in IE?
Another option might be c > tʃ > tx > tk, with the ʃ > x change stolen from Spanish.
cedh audmanh wrote:Not sure about "all environments", but at least in #_V and V_V positions c > kʲ > kt > tk seems possible, like ON mentioned above. Didn't something similar (kj > kt IIRC) happen somewhere in IE?
Another option might be c > tʃ > tx > tk, with the ʃ > x change stolen from Spanish.
Ooh, I like that better... less awkward than a regular metathesis. Do you have any non-intervocalic C, though? Because that might lead to awkward consonant clusters.
Greek had pj > pt so kj > kt isn't that far off. Most IE langs had tk > kt so reversing that seems plausible. But the one that goes through tx seems less weird.
cedh audmanh wrote:Not sure about "all environments", but at least in #_V and V_V positions c > kʲ > kt > tk seems possible, like ON mentioned above. Didn't something similar (kj > kt IIRC) happen somewhere in IE?
I know pj > pt happened in Greek. EDIT: Scooped by Nort.
What's something interesting that can happen to ie̯ uo̯? I've recently been obsessed with them but want to lose them one language.
cedh audmanh wrote:Not sure about "all environments", but at least in #_V and V_V positions c > kʲ > kt > tk seems possible, like ON mentioned above. Didn't something similar (kj > kt IIRC) happen somewhere in IE?
I know pj > pt happened in Greek. EDIT: Scooped by Nort.
What's something interesting that can happen to ie̯ uo̯? I've recently been obsessed with them but want to lose them one language.
Laryngeals! /ie̯/ > /ia̯/ > /iʕ/ (or your favourite laryngeal), /uo̯/ > /ua̯/ > /uʕ/. Okay, so it's not very exciting, but it's more exciting than /ie̯/ > /je/.
NE: this is what I did in one of my earlier conlangs, with the reasoning being that tˤ was [+Coronal][+RTR] which caused it to shift to apical postalveolar, which I think at the time people seemed to agree was at least a conceivable change. But I wouldn't take my word on it.
This is not a question, I'd just like to report a snazzy soundlaw I just found out about: Avestan has rhinoglottophilia.
*h(j) → ŋh / a_a
*hw → ŋʷh / a_a
*h → ŋ / a_ra
Also yes, for some reason this only happens between two /a/'s.
---
Re troflexes: velarization is a very plausible explanation. Consider RUKI, i.e. *s → *ʂ / {r u k i}_. IIRC a change alveolar → retroflex / u_ is also known from various Australian languages.
---
For ie̯ uo̯, some attested options:
1) → iɛ uɔ → ia ua (found in SW Finnish dialects)
2a) → iː.e uː.o (in Livonian)
2b) → je wo (also in Livonian)
3) → ʲeː ʷoː (in Southern Sami, well the 1st anyway)
4) → iɤ uɤ (in Skolt Sami)
5a) → iː uː (in Kildin Sami)
5b) → iː ɨː (in Ter Sami, probably via a Skolt-like intermediate)
ObsequiousNewt wrote:In what environment do you want /c/ > /tk/?
In all environments. The idea is that a whole series of palatal obstruents disappears by becoming alveolar/velar clusters, possibly under the influence of an adstratum language that has such clusters.
Cedh's proposal does indeed seem the most reasonable so far but I add another nonetheless:
c>kt/_r and then expanding into similar environments (like r_ and _s) until the change is present in all environments
Also, paradigm levelling, hypercorrection and spelling pronunciation.
cedh audmanh wrote:Not sure about "all environments", but at least in #_V and V_V positions c > kʲ > kt > tk seems possible, like ON mentioned above. Didn't something similar (kj > kt IIRC) happen somewhere in IE?
I know pj > pt happened in Greek. EDIT: Scooped by Nort.
Ah yes, that's what I was thinking of.
What's something interesting that can happen to ie̯ uo̯? I've recently been obsessed with them but want to lose them one language.
Front-back switch via dissimilation, based on the o > we change that happened in stressed syllables in Spanish:
ie̯ uo̯ > iə uə > jo we (> o e)
This was an old attempt to derive something from PIE, and probably not at all in accordance with the laws of sound change, but what do you think about /p t ḱ k kʷ/ > /kʷ ḱ k h~ʔ k/ when next to /h₂/? (or even with the velars fricativized.)