/j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Discussion of natural languages, or language in general.
Post Reply
PVER•PVERVM•AMAT
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:50 am

/j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by PVER•PVERVM•AMAT »

Sorry if this is clutter (there ought to be an L&L quickies section. What were the intermediaries of Latin /j/ becoming /dʒ/ in Romance? I guess /j/ > */ʝ/ > */ɟ/ > /dʒ/, but I could be wrong.

User avatar
vec
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
Contact:

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vec »

A protected /j/ (not preceded by a vowel), stemming from an initial /j/ or from a /dj/, /ɡj/, or /ɡ(eˌi)/ when preceded by a consonant, becomes /dʒ/.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonologic ... _of_French
vec

User avatar
vec
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
Contact:

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vec »

Now that it's morning I think I can do a better job of explaining.

First of all, Spanish and Portuguese went the same way, /j/ > /dʒ/ and no dialects involve any intermediaries so there is no need to assume them. This is just your basic fortition. But how does an approximant go stop, you ask?

Approximants involve the articulators getting close, but not close enough to create any kind of friction or turbulence in the airflow. It just whisks out smoothly. For some reason, they seem somewhat prone to fortition, moreso than fricatives for example. If we anthropomorphize the process, we can think of it as a case of people getting annoyed with half-assing the pronounciation of the sound. So they jump from one end of the spectrum that has the least occlusion, to the polar opposite, with a full stop of airflow. (Another common change for approximants is to simply fricativize, which is just a one-step change, and not a jump).

Such polar changes occur in many kinds of sounds. A few examples: "Peripheral" stops pairs such as p and k/q, are somewhat liable to interchange. F-sounds often move all the way to the back to h-sounds (but by way of losing their labial component and retaining only the lack of voicedness). Coronals, which are fully tongue-tip-operated sounds, are liable to glottalize, which may seem more surprising than the back-of-the-tongue-operated sounds such as c/k/q which is also common. P is less likely to glottalize for some reason.

When I devise sound changes for languages, I like to "ascribe" motivation to the sound changes. There are impatient sound changes (fortition-type things), lazy ones (lenition-type things and elimination/merger of sounds) and confused (metathesis, haplology, linear transfer of features etc.).

A fourth category would be the OCD-type, where a gap in the system gets fixed by transferring a sound for no other reason from one part of the "IPA table" to another. Often this involves changes in one of the others, but they often make less sense phonologically. The Argentinian change of intervocalic /j/ > /ʃ/, which is a bit strange, fits this bill (to make up for the fact that there is a /tʃ/). As did the Icelandic change /ɪ/, /ɛ/ > /e/ and /ʏ/, /œ/ > /ø/ which seemed to want to balance the fact that there were only three back vowel heights (/u/, /ɔ/, /a/), but four front vowel heights. This change was thought to be so disgusting that the school system eradicated it in a holy war during the 40s–60s. And yet, a similar change is cropping up again. The sound system has a will of its own.
vec

User avatar
Particles the Greek
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:48 am
Location: Between clauses

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Particles the Greek »

vec wrote:A fourth category would be the OCD-type, where a gap in the system gets fixed by transferring a sound for no other reason from one part of the "IPA table" to another. Often this involves changes in one of the others, but they often make less sense phonologically. The Argentinian change of intervocalic /j/ > /ʃ/, which is a bit strange, fits this bill (to make up for the fact that there is a /tʃ/). As did the Icelandic change /ɪ/, /ɛ/ > /e/ and /ʏ/, /œ/ > /ø/ which seemed to want to balance the fact that there were only three back vowel heights (/u/, /ɔ/, /a/), but four front vowel heights. This change was thought to be so disgusting that the school system eradicated it in a holy war during the 40s–60s. And yet, a similar change is cropping up again. The sound system has a will of its own.
Young people today, etcetera. Are there any other examples of a specific sound-change being so determinedly eliminated?
Non fidendus est crocodilus quis posteriorem dentem acerbum conquetur.

User avatar
Salmoneus
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3197
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: One of the dark places of the world

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Salmoneus »

The curl-coil merger has apparently been all but exterminated in New York, to the point of hypercorrection. And even people with the merger normally have specifically demerged 'bird' and 'boyd', so we're told.
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!

zompist
Boardlord
Boardlord
Posts: 3368
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 8:26 pm
Location: In the den
Contact:

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by zompist »

vec wrote:The Argentinian change of intervocalic /j/ > /ʃ/, which is a bit strange, fits this bill (to make up for the fact that there is a /tʃ/).
FWIW, there was an intermediate stage /ʒ/. Interestingly, there was a sex-linked opposition for awhile: men said [ʒ], women said [ʃ]. But women teach the next generation, so the change is now generalized.

(Also FWIW Argentine Spanish bordered some languages with /ʃ/— Quechua and Portuguese.)

User avatar
vec
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
Contact:

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vec »

zompist wrote:
vec wrote:The Argentinian change of intervocalic /j/ > /ʃ/, which is a bit strange, fits this bill (to make up for the fact that there is a /tʃ/).
FWIW, there was an intermediate stage /ʒ/. Interestingly, there was a sex-linked opposition for awhile: men said [ʒ], women said [ʃ]. But women teach the next generation, so the change is now generalized.

(Also FWIW Argentine Spanish bordered some languages with /ʃ/— Quechua and Portuguese.)
I see. So maybe it's not such a good example of the sound system "fixing" itself. I'm supposed to know some other examples but it might be too early in the day.
vec

vokzhen
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:43 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vokzhen »

In terms of balancing out an uneven phonology, I'm not aware of any language with /tɬ/ that doesn't have [ɬ], generally as its own phoneme, but sometimes as an allophone of /l/ before voiceless stops and/or finally. The other affricates have tendencies in that direction, either to deaffricate or have another sound change to fill the gap, but afaik none are as strong as the lateral. s>h seems especially common in languages that have /s/ as the only fricative, and š>x in languages that don't have postalveolar/retroflex/palatal stops. A lot of vowel changes probably fall into this, things simply too close together so they change; o>u after u is lost, monophthongization of ai/au after length becomes quality. And languages with only voiced fricatives (plus /s/) are extremely rare; the only one I know of for sure are some Inuit dialects which devoice geminates to fill in the gap. And less certainly, it feels to me like languages with a context-limited [j] tends to recreate it in other contexts pretty quickly.

On the other hand, /g/ OR /ɣ/ to the absence of the other doesn't seem too uncommon, /v/ without /f/ is pretty common, fewer back vowels than front isn't noteworthy and fewer front-rounded or back-unrounded than either front or back is the rule and not the exception, and palatals to my knowledge never contrast stops and affricates even when they're present in t/ts (and ʈ/ʈʂ, which is itself very rare). Except maybe f/v these are probably all acoustically motivated, though, unlike things like s>h or recreating [j].

User avatar
Hallow XIII
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:40 pm
Location: Under Heaven

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Hallow XIII »

Nahuatl.
陳第 wrote:蓋時有古今,地有南北;字有更革,音有轉移,亦勢所必至。
R.Rusanov wrote:seks istiyorum
sex want-PRS-1sg
Read all about my excellent conlangs
Basic Conlanging Advice

User avatar
Chagen
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Chagen »

vec wrote:
A fourth category would be the OCD-type, where a gap in the system gets fixed by transferring a sound for no other reason from one part of the "IPA table" to another. Often this involves changes in one of the others, but they often make less sense phonologically. The Argentinian change of intervocalic /j/ > /ʃ/, which is a bit strange, fits this bill (to make up for the fact that there is a /tʃ/). As did the Icelandic change /ɪ/, /ɛ/ > /e/ and /ʏ/, /œ/ > /ø/ which seemed to want to balance the fact that there were only three back vowel heights (/u/, /ɔ/, /a/), but four front vowel heights. This change was thought to be so disgusting that the school system eradicated it in a holy war during the 40s–60s. And yet, a similar change is cropping up again. The sound system has a will of its own.
For an even more bizarre change of this type, there was a Indo-European language that changed /j/ to effin' /ð/ of all the crazy things. I don't even think that there was a /θ/ to contrast it against. I'm pretty the language is dead now though, it was one of those wacky ones deep in Asia.
Nūdhrēmnāva naraśva, dṛk śraṣrāsit nūdhrēmanīṣṣ iźdatīyyīm woḥīm madhēyyaṣṣi.
satisfaction-DEF.SG-LOC live.PERFECTIVE-1P.INCL but work-DEF.SG-PRIV satisfaction-DEF.PL.NOM weakeness-DEF.PL-DAT only lead-FUT-3P

vokzhen
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:43 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vokzhen »

Hallow XIII wrote:Nahuatl.
If that's directed at me and my claim about /tɬ/, as far as I'm aware dialects that maintain /tɬ/ devoice /l/ to [ɬ] in certain positions. I haven't gone out of my way to try and find information on it, but I have yet to run into any counterexamples.

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by linguoboy »

Chagen wrote:For an even more bizarre change of this type, there was a Indo-European language that changed /j/ to effin' /ð/ of all the crazy things.
This happened in Osage as well. It's one of the chief isoglosses that distinguishes it from Kansa.

User avatar
Dewrad
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:02 pm

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Dewrad »

Chagen wrote:For an even more bizarre change of this type, there was a Indo-European language that changed /j/ to effin' /ð/ of all the crazy things. I don't even think that there was a /θ/ to contrast it against. I'm pretty the language is dead now though, it was one of those wacky ones deep in Asia.
The Brythonic languages also did this, albeit restricted to intervocalic position.
Some useful Dravian links: Grammar - Lexicon - Ask a Dravian
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)

User avatar
vec
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 639
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
Contact:

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by vec »

For some reason, /j/ and /w/ tend to be pretty stable adjacent to consonants but they can do whatever they want intervocalically.
vec

User avatar
Nortaneous
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 4544
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Location: the Imperial Corridor

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Nortaneous »

linguoboy wrote:
Chagen wrote:For an even more bizarre change of this type, there was a Indo-European language that changed /j/ to effin' /ð/ of all the crazy things.
This happened in Osage as well. It's one of the chief isoglosses that distinguishes it from Kansa.
Cubeo did this between nonhigh vowels.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Richard W
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:28 pm

Re: /j/ to /dʒ/ in Romance

Post by Richard W »

Dewrad wrote:
Chagen wrote:For an even more bizarre change of this type, there was a Indo-European language that changed /j/ to effin' /ð/ of all the crazy things. I don't even think that there was a /θ/ to contrast it against. I'm pretty the language is dead now though, it was one of those wacky ones deep in Asia.
The Brythonic languages also did this, albeit restricted to intervocalic position.
Gothic also. Though Gothic had /θ/ and Brythonic languages also developed /θ/.

Actually, the change of something sounding something like a palatal stop to an interdental fricative is not so unusual. We have Spanish soft 'c' = /θ/, palatalised dentals are hypothesised to have changed to interdental fricatives as Afroasiatic developed to Semitic, and IE k̂ and ĝ have regular reflexes /θ/ and /ð/ in Albanian.

Post Reply