Sound Change Quickie Thread

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.
User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

vokzhen wrote:I've also heard Classical Arabic actually had [ɢ], in which case a reflex of /g/ might just be fronting, but I'm not sure I buy that (afaik that's based on /q/ being classified by Classical Arabic grammarians along with /b d/ rather than /t k/, but a voiceless, unaspirated could have been thrown in with either).
I've heard that too, and it seems pretty likely to me given how proto-Arabic [g] fronted to [ɟ] and thence to various other sounds post-Classical Arabic (like your "satemization" example), presumably to further differentiate it from [ɢ] while [k] had no such contrast present and hence remained unaffected. That said, it definitely could have been a tenuis stop while /t k/ were aspirated. It's hard to say, especially since voicing contrasts with stops seem to be hard for languages to maintain at the uvular POA. (Plenty of languages have /q/, and a smaller but not that small number have /ɢ/, but surprisingly few have both.)

FWIW, I've also seen resources on Arabic claim that all emphatics were voiced in Classical Arabic, giving [dˤ] for modern [tˤ] and [zˤ] for modern [sˤ].
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

KathTheDragon wrote:Is *V *Vh > Ø V plausible? V can be any vowel, long or short.
Depends. Are you saying that every single vowel that isn't followed by a [h] is lost? If so, I'd say that strains credibility. But maybe you mean something less sweeping.
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

Chengjiang wrote:
Nannalu wrote:Is there any way I could create /ʕ/ and /Cˤ/ from an SAE inventory?
To add to the posts suggesting deriving them from rhotics, dorsals, and clusters thereof, I'd also like to note that dental consonants are often at least slightly pharyngealized naturally, especially [l]. (Hence "clear L" versus "dark L".) You can easily have a contrast between two types of coronal consonant turn into a pharyngealized/clear contrast, e.g. lamino-dental /ts dz s/ versus apico-alveolar /ts dz s/ turning into /tsˤ dzˤ sˤ/ versus /ts dz s/. And since I brought up clear and dark L, laterals are another good source of pharyngeal consonants or pharyngealization, e.g. [VlC] > [VlˤC] > your pick of [VʕC], [VˤC], or [VCˤ].

Addendum: Retracted vowels, a.k.a. open back vowels, are also typically somewhat pharyngealized to begin with, and so consonants or other vowels in their vicinity may become pharyngealized. You could have, say, [C] > [Cˤ] when the following vowel is one of [ɑ ɒ ʌ ɔ] and then do some vowel shifts to make the pharyngealization contrastive. You could also have diphthongs with an opening glide (e.g. non-rhotic German's diphthongs ending in non-syllabic [ɐ]) become pharyngealized vowels.
Actually, now I'm curious. What's the SAE inventory you're starting with? I don't want to advise changes deriving from segments or environments you may not have.
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

User avatar
Nannalu
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 698
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Nannalu »

Chengjiang wrote:
Chengjiang wrote:
Nannalu wrote:Is there any way I could create /ʕ/ and /Cˤ/ from an SAE inventory?
To add to the posts suggesting deriving them from rhotics, dorsals, and clusters thereof, I'd also like to note that dental consonants are often at least slightly pharyngealized naturally, especially [l]. (Hence "clear L" versus "dark L".) You can easily have a contrast between two types of coronal consonant turn into a pharyngealized/clear contrast, e.g. lamino-dental /ts dz s/ versus apico-alveolar /ts dz s/ turning into /tsˤ dzˤ sˤ/ versus /ts dz s/. And since I brought up clear and dark L, laterals are another good source of pharyngeal consonants or pharyngealization, e.g. [VlC] > [VlˤC] > your pick of [VʕC], [VˤC], or [VCˤ].

Addendum: Retracted vowels, a.k.a. open back vowels, are also typically somewhat pharyngealized to begin with, and so consonants or other vowels in their vicinity may become pharyngealized. You could have, say, [C] > [Cˤ] when the following vowel is one of [ɑ ɒ ʌ ɔ] and then do some vowel shifts to make the pharyngealization contrastive. You could also have diphthongs with an opening glide (e.g. non-rhotic German's diphthongs ending in non-syllabic [ɐ]) become pharyngealized vowels.
Actually, now I'm curious. What's the SAE inventory you're starting with? I don't want to advise changes deriving from segments or environments you may not have.
Latin, I'm attempting a romlang based around Carthage.
næn:älʉː

User avatar
KathTheDragon
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Location: Brittania

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by KathTheDragon »

Chengjiang wrote:
KathTheDragon wrote:Is *V *Vh > Ø V plausible? V can be any vowel, long or short.
Depends. Are you saying that every single vowel that isn't followed by a [h] is lost? If so, I'd say that strains credibility. But maybe you mean something less sweeping.
Oh, sorry, yes, I meant to say word-finally.

User avatar
StrangerCoug
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 8:56 pm
Location: El Paso, TX

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by StrangerCoug »

KathTheDragon wrote:
Chengjiang wrote:
KathTheDragon wrote:Is *V *Vh > Ø V plausible? V can be any vowel, long or short.
Depends. Are you saying that every single vowel that isn't followed by a [h] is lost? If so, I'd say that strains credibility. But maybe you mean something less sweeping.
Oh, sorry, yes, I meant to say word-finally.
I can buy that.
Current avatar by malibupup of FurAffinity.

My conlangs on this site:
Proto-Wideriver

Atrulfal
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:35 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Atrulfal »

I know ɲ >j̃ is a thing, but how about this:

n̠ʲ > j̃

Could it work/happen ?

EDIT:

Also

c ɟ k g > k g q ɢ ?

Travis B.
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3570
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: Milwaukee, US

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Travis B. »

Atrulfal wrote:I know ɲ >j̃ is a thing, but how about this:

n̠ʲ > j̃

Could it work/happen ?
One could just turn it into n̠ʲ > ɲ > j̃ and then it is perfectly plausible.
Atrulfal wrote:EDIT:

Also

c ɟ k g > k g q ɢ ?
As a general pattern, velars tend to turn into palatals or alveolopalatals and not the other way around (does anyone here know any examples of a palatal or alveolopalatal turning into a velar?). On the other hand, the sound change k >q does happen, especially conditionally (e.g. when before a low central or low back vowel). It should be noted that k > q is much more common than g > ɢ, as if there is any voiced stop missing it is ɢ; ɢ tends to arise through things like the voicing of q, when it arises at all.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.

User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

Atrulfal wrote:I know ɲ >j̃ is a thing, but how about this:

n̠ʲ > j̃

Could it work/happen ?
Yes. [n̠ʲ] is sufficiently close to [ɲ] that basically any sound change applicable to one is applicable to the other.
c ɟ k g > k g q ɢ ?
I know that most Turkic languages have both a front and a back dorsal series, which manifest as palatal vs. velar in some languages and velar vs. uvular in others, and depending on specific features of the individual language may be analyzed as allophones of a single series or as phonemically distinct. Proto-Turkic apparently had a single dorsal series (presumably velar) and I don't know which set-up is older.

Also, while I'm not aware of any certain cases of true palatal stops backing (although a minority view of Proto-Indo-European has palatals for one of its dorsal series, which would have backed in centum languages)...
Travis B. wrote:(does anyone here know any examples of a palatal or alveolopalatal turning into a velar?)
Palatoalveolars are confirmed as backing to velar in quite a few cases, albeit usually to velar fricatives. Spanish had [ʃ] and [ʒ] > [x], Proto-Slavic had [ʃ] or something close to it become [x], and Assamese had all three original sibilant fricatives of Indo-Aryan become [x] if I remember correctly. Granted, once you get velar fricatives you could have them fortite to stops, and you could have palatals shift to palatoalveolars if you wanted to do this. So if nothing else there's a rather roundabout way to turn palatal stops into velar stops.
It should be noted that k > q is much more common than g > ɢ, as if there is any voiced stop missing it is ɢ; ɢ tends to arise through things like the voicing of q, when it arises at all.
That's true but somewhat misleading. [g] backs roughly as readily as [k] does, but it more usually becomes [ʁ] than [ɢ], possibly with [ɢ] as a short-lived middle stage on the way. [ɢ] is a rather unstable segment and tends to become a fricative, although if it's present without [q] it may devoice to [q] instead.
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

Vijay
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 3:25 pm
Location: Austin, TX, USA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Vijay »

Chengjiang wrote:Assamese had all three original sibilant fricatives of Indo-Aryan become [x] if I remember correctly.
Yep. In Bengali, they merged to [ʃ], but in Assamese, they've all changed to [x].

EDIT: And both languages use almost the exact same orthography and have distinct symbols for all three sibilants. :D

Travis B.
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3570
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: Milwaukee, US

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Travis B. »

Chengjiang wrote:
Travis B. wrote:(does anyone here know any examples of a palatal or alveolopalatal turning into a velar?)
Palatoalveolars are confirmed as backing to velar in quite a few cases, albeit usually to velar fricatives. Spanish had [ʃ] and [ʒ] > [x], Proto-Slavic had [ʃ] or something close to it become [x], and Assamese had all three original sibilant fricatives of Indo-Aryan become [x] if I remember correctly. Granted, once you get velar fricatives you could have them fortite to stops, and you could have palatals shift to palatoalveolars if you wanted to do this. So if nothing else there's a rather roundabout way to turn palatal stops into velar stops.
I should have clarified and stated that I meant palatal or alveolopalatal plosives becoming velar plosives.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.

User avatar
KathTheDragon
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Location: Brittania

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by KathTheDragon »

What's the most likely way for a system t t' tʰ to become t t:? Probably tʰ > t:, and t > t, but which would t' merge with? Or are there other likely options?

Travis B.
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 3570
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: Milwaukee, US

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Travis B. »

KathTheDragon wrote:What's the most likely way for a system t t' tʰ to become t t:? Probably tʰ > t:, and t > t, but which would t' merge with? Or are there other likely options?
My guess is that ejectives would be more likely to merge with tenuis plosives than with aspirated ones.
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.

User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

Travis B. wrote:
KathTheDragon wrote:What's the most likely way for a system t t' tʰ to become t t:? Probably tʰ > t:, and t > t, but which would t' merge with? Or are there other likely options?
My guess is that ejectives would be more likely to merge with tenuis plosives than with aspirated ones.
While that's probably true in general, in this specific case since you end up with a kind of lenis-fortis opposition I could see the ejectives and aspirates both becoming fortis (long) and the tenuis becoming lenis (short).

Another possibility altogether is that all three types of stop merge (as in some dialects of Quechua) and long stops derive from clusters.
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

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

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by vokzhen »

Chengjiang wrote:Another possibility altogether is that all three types of stop merge (as in some dialects of Quechua) and long stops derive from clusters.
Zompist has said elsewhere that it seems more likely they were borrowed and then incorporated into native lexicon. Quechua on the whole only has a single series; Southern Quechua (including the Cuzco prestige dialect) is in contact with Aymara, which has a plain-aspirate-ejective contrast, and gained aspirate and ejective series through contact.

User avatar
Pole, the
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1606
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Pole, the »

I should have clarified and stated that I meant palatal or alveolopalatal plosives becoming velar plosives.
c ɟ → tɕ dʑ → tʃ dʒ → ʈ ɖ → k ɡ
:P
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

Atrulfal
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:35 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Atrulfal »

I had some ideas and I wanted feedback on them:

tʲ dʲ > tʃ dʒ
nʲ > ɲ
x > h > ŋ
ʃ > x
ʒ > ʃ
rʲ lʲ > ʎ
ʋ > w
z > r
x > h
b d g > β ð ɣ
p t k > b d g/{# V}_V
β ɣ > v h
w > f

EDIT:

Ṽ >Vː
e o > ɛ ɔ
i u > e o
C > Cǝ/{C #}_{C #}
V > ǝ (short vowels in unstressed syllables after the stressed syllable)
Vː > V

User avatar
sangi39
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 3:34 am
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by sangi39 »

tʲ dʲ > tʃ dʒ - Yep. Polish went down this direction, IIRC, but ended up with /tɕ/ and /dʑ/ instead
nʲ > ɲ - Again, Polish has this
x > h > ŋ - Rhinoglottophilia, maybe, but I'm not sure that's ever affected /h/
ʃ > x - Old Spanish > Modern Spanish

ʒ > ʃ - After /ʃ/ > /x/? I would have assumed /ʒ/ > /ɣ/ would occur at this point, but I could be wrong

rʲ lʲ > ʎ - The latter is very likely (again, Polish).
ʋ > w - Makes sense
z > r - Non-East Germanic I think, and Latin
x > h - Again, makes sense
b d g > β ð ɣ - Spanish
p t k > b d g/{# V}_V - If I'm reading this right, Was that a Western Romance phenomenon
β ɣ > v h - Pretty sure someone mentioned something close to /ɣ/ > /h/ in one of the modern Iberian languages and/or some Ukrainian dialects. /β/ > /v/ makes sense

w > f - This one I'm not sure on

Ṽ >Vː - Lithuanian?
e o > ɛ ɔ - Happened in Vulgar Latin
i u > e o - Happened in (Late?) Vulgar Latin, with intermediate /ɪ ʊ/

C > Cǝ/{C #}_{C #} Clearly failing here at notation *pointing at myself*

V > ǝ (short vowels in unstressed syllables after the stressed syllable) - I'm sure there are examples of this sort of thing. English reduces vowels in a similar way.
Vː > V - Shortening of long vowels is pretty common
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

User avatar
Pole, the
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1606
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Pole, the »

tʲ dʲ > tʃ dʒ - Yep. Polish went down this direction, IIRC, but ended up with /tɕ/ and /dʑ/ instead
I guess in many languages [tɕ dʑ] could be mislabeled as [tʃ dʒ].
rʲ lʲ > ʎ - The latter is very likely (again, Polish).
Actually, Polish is one of the few Slavic languages not preserving the palatalization here. However, Slovak and Serbo-Croat had the latter.

In Hungarian it went one step further, with [ʎ] → [j].
p t k > b d g/{# V}_V - If I'm reading this right, Was that a Western Romance phenomenon
IIANM, the Romance had it only V_V, not #_V.
w > f - This one I'm not sure on
I would shuffle these two and make: first [ʋ] → [v] → [f], then [β] → [v].
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

User avatar
sangi39
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 3:34 am
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by sangi39 »

Pole, the wrote:
tʲ dʲ > tʃ dʒ - Yep. Polish went down this direction, IIRC, but ended up with /tɕ/ and /dʑ/ instead
I guess in many languages [tɕ dʑ] could be mislabeled as [tʃ dʒ].
True, and hasn't that been discussed recently in another thread?


Pole, the wrote:
rʲ lʲ > ʎ - The latter is very likely (again, Polish).
Actually, Polish is one of the few Slavic languages not preserving the palatalization here. However, Slovak and Serbo-Croat had the latter.

In Hungarian it went one step further, with [ʎ] → [j].
Oh nuts, yeah. I don't know why I thought Polish was an example :P


Pole, the wrote:
p t k > b d g/{# V}_V - If I'm reading this right, Was that a Western Romance phenomenon
IIANM, the Romance had it only V_V, not #_V.
I'm never entirely sure on this kind of notation (I don't use it a lot myself), but if it means initially as well, without a preceding vowel, I guess it would be unlikely. Like, between vowels, yeah, but not initially as well.


Pole, the wrote:
w > f - This one I'm not sure on
I would shuffle these two and make: first [ʋ] → [v] → [f], then [β] → [v].
That might work. Maybe throw in some conditional changes:

[ʋ] → [v] → [f] when adjacent to a voiceless sound THEN
[β] → [w] → [v] when not next to a voiceless sound nor in coda position.

So [β] and [ʋ] merge between vowels and when following a voiced sound, but remain distinct when following a voiceless sound and when in coda position. Could make for some nice alternations depending on morphology.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

Atrulfal
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:35 pm

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Atrulfal »

sangi39 wrote: I'm never entirely sure on this kind of notation (I don't use it a lot myself), but if it means initially as well, without a preceding vowel, I guess it would be unlikely. Like, between vowels, yeah, but not initially as well.
Initial voicing is something normal AFAIK. It happened in German and Dutch as well, can't see why it wouldn't be able to happen here.
sangi39 wrote:C > Cǝ/{C #}_{C #} Clearly failing here at notation *pointing at myself*
Correct me if I'm wrong, # is supposed to symbolize a word boundary, either initially or finally. So the idea here is that a /ǝ/ would emerge when:

CCC > CCǝC
CC# > CCǝ#
#CC > #CǝC
or
#C# > #Cǝ#
Last edited by Atrulfal on Wed Feb 24, 2016 7:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Pole, the
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1606
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:50 am

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Pole, the »

Well, I think [v] → [f] doesn't need to be conditional; it looks very natural in a system with no other voiced fricatives. (Which seems to be the case here, after [ʒ] → [ʃ] and [z] → [r].)

I think I have heard Finns pronouncing /ʋ/ as an unvoiced sound (maybe [ɸ], maybe something closer to [ʋ̥]?) on occasion. I have heard hyvää päivä with the first element shortened to [ɸæ] or such. I have also heard it in other positions, for instance once I mistook viisitoista for something like /pist-/.
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.

If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

User avatar
Chengjiang
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Davis, CA

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Chengjiang »

Pole, the wrote:Well, I think [v] → [f] doesn't need to be conditional; it looks very natural in a system with no other voiced fricatives. (Which seems to be the case here, after [ʒ] → [ʃ] and [z] → [r].)
IIRC some dialects of Dutch merge [v] into [f] (along with neutralizing voice in the other fricatives in many cases), and at some point in its evolution German merged a [v] into [f] (only to gain a new [v] from earlier [ʋ] and even earlier [w]).
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.

User avatar
sangi39
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 3:34 am
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by sangi39 »

Seems I could have been mistaken. Always good to know :)
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

Porphyrogenitos
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:13 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread

Post by Porphyrogenitos »

Travis B. wrote:does anyone here know any examples of a palatal or alveolopalatal turning into a velar?
Didn't Egyptian Arabic turn /dʒ/ into /g/?

Post Reply