Well, not into velar, but with them, such that there isn't a/x/ (except when /k/ is lenited in some dialects) nor /ħ/ anymore but instead /X/.Vijay wrote:Huh? When did pharyngeals merge into velars in Hebrew? Didn't /ʕ/ become a glottal stop and /ħ/ become /x/ for most speakers? Also, apparently, Georgian Jews(?) pronounce /ʕ/ as [q'].
Sound Change Quickie Thread
- احمکي ارش-ھجن
- Avisaru
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:45 pm
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
ʾAšol ḵavad pulqam ʾifbižen lav ʾifšimeḻ lit maseḡrad lav lit n͛ubad. ʾUpulasim ṗal sa-panžun lav sa-ḥadṇ lav ṗal šarmaḵeš lit ʾaẏṭ waẏyadanun wižqanam.
- Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
-
- Lebom
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 11:22 am
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Intergalactic Standard and Baikal have merged [ʁ ɹ l] into [ʟ̠]. What effect would that have on [ɬ]? According to this chart, the resulting change doesn't have a letter and may be completely unattested. Also, [r] has merged into [ʀ] due to the loss of [ɹ].
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
I doubt [ʟ̠] is stable as a phoneme anyway. It probably shift to a velar and pair with /ʟ̝̊/
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť
kårroť
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
I likewise highly doubt [ʟ̠] would exist for long, and question the likelihood of a sound change that would produce it in the first place. Same thing with its voiceless fricative counterpart.
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.
-
- Lebom
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 11:22 am
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Okay. Then, the merger will have been [ɹ l ʟ→ʁ].
Reposting the following because the original was lost in the shuffle of another conversation:
For a bit of context, <nk ng> assimilate into [ŋ] word-finally and preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] in Intergalactic Standard. If this would create minimal pairs, the words retain their former <nk ng> spellings, as opposed to the shortened <n> spellings of unpaired words. Would [ni→ɲ] preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] be a logical progression as well?
Reposting the following because the original was lost in the shuffle of another conversation:
For a bit of context, <nk ng> assimilate into [ŋ] word-finally and preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] in Intergalactic Standard. If this would create minimal pairs, the words retain their former <nk ng> spellings, as opposed to the shortened <n> spellings of unpaired words. Would [ni→ɲ] preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] be a logical progression as well?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
ni > ɲ is not exactly the sort of sound change one needs to justify. Palatalization before high front vowels needs no excuse.yangfiretiger121 wrote:Okay. Then, the merger will have been [ɹ l ʟ→ʁ].
Reposting the following because the original was lost in the shuffle of another conversation:
For a bit of context, <nk ng> assimilate into [ŋ] word-finally and preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] in Intergalactic Standard. If this would create minimal pairs, the words retain their former <nk ng> spellings, as opposed to the shortened <n> spellings of unpaired words. Would [ni→ɲ] preceding a word-final [ɑ o u] be a logical progression as well?
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: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Is it possible to somehow turn palatals into retroflexes, or vice versa?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Alveolopalatals have become retroflexes in various Slavic languages.Knit Tie wrote:Is it possible to somehow turn palatals into retroflexes, or vice versa?
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: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Are those true retroflexes, though? As far as I know, Slavic retroflex fricatives are just apical postalveolar.Travis B. wrote:Alveolopalatals have become retroflexes in various Slavic languages.Knit Tie wrote:Is it possible to somehow turn palatals into retroflexes, or vice versa?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Machvano Vlax Romani has /t͡ʃʰ/ > [ʈr] and /d͡ʒ/ > [ɖr].
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Palatals became apical postalveolar in Mandarin, and Slavic has apical postalveolars as outcomes of palatalizing sound changes.
Aren't true retroflexes very rare outside Dravidian? And do they ever contrast with apical postalveolars?
A voiceless velar lateral fricative is attested in a few languages in New Guinea. As for where to go from there, Hiw developed gL\) from *r and is currently merging it into G, so L\_0 L\ > x G seems reasonable. But you wouldn't have so many consonants merging into velar laterals, much less postvelar. Maybe K l > s` r\, r\ > L\; could also have s` > L\_0.
Aren't true retroflexes very rare outside Dravidian? And do they ever contrast with apical postalveolars?
A voiceless velar lateral fricative is attested in a few languages in New Guinea. As for where to go from there, Hiw developed gL\) from *r and is currently merging it into G, so L\_0 L\ > x G seems reasonable. But you wouldn't have so many consonants merging into velar laterals, much less postvelar. Maybe K l > s` r\, r\ > L\; could also have s` > L\_0.
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: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Yes.Nortaneous wrote:do they ever contrast with apical postalveolars?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
True, subapical palatal retroflexes are also found almost everywhere in Australian aboriginal languages, where they happily contrast with apical alveolars and laminal palatals.Nortaneous wrote: Aren't true retroflexes very rare outside Dravidian? And do they ever contrast with apical postalveolars?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
To continue bothering people with my conlang, would you say that /ʕ/ and /ʁ/ merging together into /ɰ/, which then subsequently becomes /ə̯/ in coda to form centralising diphthongs is plausible? Also, how can you turn /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ into /s̪/ through an intermediate without using /ɬ/, and what can you do with /ɫ̪ˤ/ and /ɾ̪ˤ/ that isn't too outlandish aside from merging them with regular liquids?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Is the dental flap a variant of the coronal, always pharyngealizedm? I think that the pharyngealization would stick around longer than the dental articulation.
Spanish did something very similar with its sibilants....
The palatal sibilants turned into apical sounds, which skipped past the alveolar sound and into the dental.
÷÷÷÷÷
Neither my phone nor my pc is capable of adding "pharyngealization " to its dictionary, I'm guessing it hits a limit of number of letters. Sorry for persistent typos.
Spanish did something very similar with its sibilants....
The palatal sibilants turned into apical sounds, which skipped past the alveolar sound and into the dental.
÷÷÷÷÷
Neither my phone nor my pc is capable of adding "pharyngealization " to its dictionary, I'm guessing it hits a limit of number of letters. Sorry for persistent typos.
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
The dental flap is indeed a variant of the coronal, and I'm trying to get rid of the pharyngealised series as a whole.
As for the postalveolars, I'm afraid simply shifting them to /s̪/ won't work, as I'm trying to, essentially, have /s/ and /ʃ/ switch places. Or did you mean something else by that Spanish example?
As for the postalveolars, I'm afraid simply shifting them to /s̪/ won't work, as I'm trying to, essentially, have /s/ and /ʃ/ switch places. Or did you mean something else by that Spanish example?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Well, as far as plausability goes, no intermediate necessary. Devoicing /ʒ/ > /ʃ/ is extremely plausible; /ʃ/ > /s̪/ is also extremely plausible. If you want /ʃ/ and /s/ to switch places, how about this:Knit Tie wrote:Also, how can you turn /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ into /s̪/ through an intermediate without using /ɬ/
/s/ > /s̠/ > /ʃ/ (pretty certain this is attested in some languages in the American Southwest)
/ʃ ʒ/ > /s̪/
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
s > θ (Zhuang, Turkmen, Burmese)
ʃ > s
θ > ʃ (Biblical Hebrew)
ʃ > s
θ > ʃ (Biblical Hebrew)
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: Sound Change Quickie Thread
This looks nice, Nort, but I'm not sure if I can exclude the dental /s̪ˤ/ from this change, as I'd like to do. Perhaps I could go with something like this?Nortaneous wrote:s > θ (Zhuang, Turkmen, Burmese)
ʃ > s
θ > ʃ (Biblical Hebrew)
s̪ˤ > θ
ʃ > s̻
s > s̺ > ʃ
s̻ > s
θ > s
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
So your ultimate goal is that s > ʃ, s̪ˤ ʃ > s? What you posite works, but I think it can be done more simply.Knit Tie wrote:This looks nice, Nort, but I'm not sure if I can exclude the dental /s̪ˤ/ from this change, as I'd like to do. Perhaps I could go with something like this?Nortaneous wrote:s > θ (Zhuang, Turkmen, Burmese)
ʃ > s
θ > ʃ (Biblical Hebrew)
s̪ˤ > θ
ʃ > s̻
s > s̺ > ʃ
s̻ > s
θ > s
s > s̺ > ʃ
ʃ > s (no intermediate necessary, widely attested)
s̪ˤ > s
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
So two phonemes can simply switch like that? Without merging?Zaarin wrote: So your ultimate goal is that s > ʃ, s̪ˤ ʃ > s? What you posite works, but I think it can be done more simply.
s > s̺ > ʃ
ʃ > s (no intermediate necessary, widely attested)
s̪ˤ > s
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Note the intermediate step of s̺.Knit Tie wrote:So two phonemes can simply switch like that? Without merging?Zaarin wrote: So your ultimate goal is that s > ʃ, s̪ˤ ʃ > s? What you posite works, but I think it can be done more simply.
s > s̺ > ʃ
ʃ > s (no intermediate necessary, widely attested)
s̪ˤ > s
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.
-
- Lebom
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 11:22 am
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
[Redacted for further discussion in my inventory questions topic.]
Last edited by yangfiretiger121 on Sun Mar 11, 2018 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
I think something like that might have happened in some Eastern Indo-Aryan language varieties with [s] vs. [ʃ].Knit Tie wrote:So two phonemes can simply switch like that? Without merging?
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
apparently Mandan did that
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.