Sound Change Quickie Thread
-
- Sanci
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:16 pm
- Location: [hʉdʒaneːɾʷ]
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Not really a sound change, but is word-final /p t k/ -> [ʋ s̪ x*] a reasonable phonemic alternation? I intended to use these three phonemes (/p t k/) as some sort of verbal thematic vowel for inflections, since word-final stops aren't allowed, but I also have /ʋ s̪ x/ as independent phonemes...
*actually [h], since word-final /x/ becomes [h]...
*actually [h], since word-final /x/ becomes [h]...
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
A quick google search showed final stops becoming fricatives in a bunch of languages, though most of them were under some sort of condition, e.g. dorsal consonants only or following a back vowel. I would however expect p > ɸ or at least something voiceless (e.g. h). Also note you don't need to have /k/ be [h], if /x/ is [h] in word final position then /k/ could easily be [x] as there is no conflict if it happens in the right order.
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Okay so Proto-Halauzhani has a lopsided frequency of vowels and dipthongs. In order from most frequent to least frequent they are a a: ai au i i: r= u u:. /a/ is the most frequent by far (having come from *e, *o, and *a).
I have a feeling this will balance some in daughter languages. What are some possibilities for shifting or splitting or whatever will even the system up some?
As for environments the language has bilabials, dentals, post-alveolars, palatals, and velars for points of articulation as well as oral stops and affricates (with voicing distinction), nasal stops, fricatives, approximants, and a trill for methods of articulation. Some syllables have CjV clusters though it alternates with CijV after "heavy syllables". Since /l/ < */rj/ this lead to the alternation ClV and CrijV.I'm not sure if it matters but there is also an alternation of CvV and CuvV under the same "heavy syllable" conditioning.
I have a feeling this will balance some in daughter languages. What are some possibilities for shifting or splitting or whatever will even the system up some?
As for environments the language has bilabials, dentals, post-alveolars, palatals, and velars for points of articulation as well as oral stops and affricates (with voicing distinction), nasal stops, fricatives, approximants, and a trill for methods of articulation. Some syllables have CjV clusters though it alternates with CijV after "heavy syllables". Since /l/ < */rj/ this lead to the alternation ClV and CrijV.I'm not sure if it matters but there is also an alternation of CvV and CuvV under the same "heavy syllable" conditioning.
- WeepingElf
- Smeric
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
How fine is /ʕ/ > /ʀ/ > /r/?
...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
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
How about aː > ɑː > ɒː > oː (and lose the lentgth distinction if you want, but you could also keep it)? And ai > e, au > o.Přemysl wrote:Okay so Proto-Halauzhani has a lopsided frequency of vowels and dipthongs. In order from most frequent to least frequent they are a a: ai au i i: r= u u:. /a/ is the most frequent by far (having come from *e, *o, and *a).
I have a feeling this will balance some in daughter languages. What are some possibilities for shifting or splitting or whatever will even the system up some?
As for environments the language has bilabials, dentals, post-alveolars, palatals, and velars for points of articulation as well as oral stops and affricates (with voicing distinction), nasal stops, fricatives, approximants, and a trill for methods of articulation. Some syllables have CjV clusters though it alternates with CijV after "heavy syllables". Since /l/ < */rj/ this lead to the alternation ClV and CrijV.I'm not sure if it matters but there is also an alternation of CvV and CuvV under the same "heavy syllable" conditioning.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:47 pm
- Location: Leiden, the Netherlands
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Dipthongization is your answer !a a: ai au i i: r= u u:
a: keep as is
a: what the guy above said, eventually becoming /ɔ:/
ai -> /ɛɪ/
au -> /ɑːw/
i: keep as is
i: -> /ɛɪ/
r=: keep as is, or /ɹ=/
u, merge with u:
This will give you a pretty balanced system of:
/a/, /ɔ:/, /ɛɪ/ /ɑːw/ /i/ /ɹ=/ /u/
/u/ will still be pretty rare, simply because you didn't have /o/ in the first place. You could solve this by making some common morphemes so that they contain this phoneme (like in Biblical Hebrew, where /u/ isn't the most ubiquitous sound either). The /ɛɪ/ merger is a good way to get rid of one uncommon sound.
What you could do, is /r=/ -> /ɹʷ=/ (this happened in, for example, Leiden Dutch, though it never had pure syllabic /r/), and then get rid of it to produce more /u/'s.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
First part is fine, second part I can't see happening, although watch some Austronesian lang turn out to have it.WeepingElf wrote:How fine is /ʕ/ > /ʀ/ > /r/?
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
Not only plausible but likely.Solarius wrote:Is h changing to ʔ plausible?
- WeepingElf
- Smeric
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Your vowel system looks a lot like that of Sanskrit to me, so a look at the developments in Indo-Aryan languages may be helpful.Přemysl wrote:Okay so Proto-Halauzhani has a lopsided frequency of vowels and dipthongs. In order from most frequent to least frequent they are a a: ai au i i: r= u u:. /a/ is the most frequent by far (having come from *e, *o, and *a).
I have a feeling this will balance some in daughter languages. What are some possibilities for shifting or splitting or whatever will even the system up some?
As for environments the language has bilabials, dentals, post-alveolars, palatals, and velars for points of articulation as well as oral stops and affricates (with voicing distinction), nasal stops, fricatives, approximants, and a trill for methods of articulation. Some syllables have CjV clusters though it alternates with CijV after "heavy syllables". Since /l/ < */rj/ this lead to the alternation ClV and CrijV.I'm not sure if it matters but there is also an alternation of CvV and CuvV under the same "heavy syllable" conditioning.
...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
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
- Ser
- Smeric
- Posts: 1542
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:55 am
- Location: Vancouver, British Columbia / Colombie Britannique, Canada
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Some people think [ʀ] > [r] might have happened in Biblical Hebrew (noting /r/ behaves like a "laryngeal" consonant morphophonologically)...Nortaneous wrote:First part is fine, second part I can't see happening, although watch some Austronesian lang turn out to have it.WeepingElf wrote:How fine is /ʕ/ > /ʀ/ > /r/?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Well...sort of, a lot of them do, assuming the normal reconstruction of the Proto-Austronesian trill R as */ʀ/ is accurate? (it ends up as /r/ in a number of languages, but also things like /g/ and /h/ in others, soooo...)Nortaneous wrote:First part is fine, second part I can't see happening, although watch some Austronesian lang turn out to have it.WeepingElf wrote:How fine is /ʕ/ > /ʀ/ > /r/?
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
The language is Indo-Iranian so yeah the systems are similar. But thank you for the suggestion. I had only been looking at Old Persian and Avestan for inspiration, I had forgotten about Indic languages.WeepingElf wrote:Your vowel system looks a lot like that of Sanskrit to me, so a look at the developments in Indo-Aryan languages may be helpful.
I had even been toying with the idea of i and u affection, so:
xvaadahi kanlangalai: apudkast ati hizhuubiyah tashanaabiyah ka viraibiyah yaah tashanti avaa. >
xvaadehi kanlangalei: opudkast eti hizhuubiyah tashanaebiyah ke vireibiyah yaah tashenti avaa.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:47 pm
- Location: Leiden, the Netherlands
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Oh, I just saw this now.Taernsietr wrote:Not really a sound change, but is word-final /p t k/ -> [ʋ s̪ x*] a reasonable phonemic alternation? I intended to use these three phonemes (/p t k/) as some sort of verbal thematic vowel for inflections, since word-final stops aren't allowed, but I also have /ʋ s̪ x/ as independent phonemes...
*actually [h], since word-final /x/ becomes [h]...
Biblical Hebrew turns intervocalic and word-final /p/, /t/, /k/, /b/, /d/, /g/ into their lenited counterparts /f/, /θ/ /x/ /v/ /ð/ /ɣ/. Old Irish also has lenition word-finally /b/ /d/ /g/ -> /v/ ð/ /ɣ/.
I would keep the /x/ versus /h/ distinction, except if /x/ -> /h/ is a later change. In Zeelandic Dutch, /h/ disappeared entirely and /x/ became /h/ (well, it still has a somewhat dorsal articulation, but it sounds more like [h]. Shifts of these sort happen all the time.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:47 pm
- Location: Leiden, the Netherlands
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
How do they know that it was ever pronounced [r]? Perhaps it has always been an uvular r? Many Dutch dialects have only an uvular trill, so that's not very weird or anything.Serafín wrote:Some people think [ʀ] > [r] might have happened in Biblical Hebrew (noting /r/ behaves like a "laryngeal" consonant morphophonologically)...Nortaneous wrote:First part is fine, second part I can't see happening, although watch some Austronesian lang turn out to have it.WeepingElf wrote:How fine is /ʕ/ > /ʀ/ > /r/?
I find it quite strange that /r/ cannot be geminated, anyway, since most languages have no problems with that. At least it doesn't attract a-type vowels, so it must have never been pronounced /ʁ/ like some people do today...
-
- Sanci
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:16 pm
- Location: [hʉdʒaneːɾʷ]
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Oh. But in my conlang's case, it's not diachronic, just a phoneme alternation (/ʋ s̪ x/ do exist as different phonemes in the language)... Also, it's not /p t k/ -> /f θ x/ as is common.sirdanilot wrote:Oh, I just saw this now.Taernsietr wrote:Not really a sound change, but is word-final /p t k/ -> [ʋ s̪ x*] a reasonable phonemic alternation? I intended to use these three phonemes (/p t k/) as some sort of verbal thematic vowel for inflections, since word-final stops aren't allowed, but I also have /ʋ s̪ x/ as independent phonemes...
*actually [h], since word-final /x/ becomes [h]...
Biblical Hebrew turns intervocalic and word-final /p/, /t/, /k/, /b/, /d/, /g/ into their lenited counterparts /f/, /θ/ /x/ /v/ /ð/ /ɣ/. Old Irish also has lenition word-finally /b/ /d/ /g/ -> /v/ ð/ /ɣ/.
I would keep the /x/ versus /h/ distinction, except if /x/ -> /h/ is a later change. In Zeelandic Dutch, /h/ disappeared entirely and /x/ became /h/ (well, it still has a somewhat dorsal articulation, but it sounds more like [h]. Shifts of these sort happen all the time.
I'm keeping the [x] vs [h] distinction though. Maybe I'll base more things on this alternation the same way. Thanks, people!
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Is it plausible for breathy voiced consonants to become creaky voiced and then ejectives?
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Yes, very plausible8Deer wrote:Is it plausible for breathy voiced consonants to become creaky voiced and then ejectives?
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Uh, probably not? Breathy and creaky voice are on opposite sides of modal voice.
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.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
It's not a continuum, as far as I can reckon. Like isolation and synthesis.Nortaneous wrote:Uh, probably not? Breathy and creaky voice are on opposite sides of modal voice.
Breathy can make low-pitched stuff, which can make it creaky, which can go to ejectivisation.
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
you """"""""""""""reckon""""""""""""""""
how about reading a thing instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonation
how about reading a thing instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonation
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.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Then how can you explain the fact that I can transit my voice from breathy to creaky without touching modal voiced?Nortaneous wrote:you """"""""""""""reckon""""""""""""""""
how about reading a thing instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonation
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Man you should totally write a paper based on your extensive research and get it published
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Srsly though.Whimemsz wrote:Man you should totally write a paper based on your extensive research and get it published
This is what I do (learning from Hindi movies):
When it further constricts, it causes creaky voice, at least for me.Wikipedia wrote:A third is to constrict the glottis, but separate the arytenoid cartilages that control one end. This results in the vocal cords being drawn together for voicing in the back, but separated to allow the passage of large volumes of air in the front.
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: Sound Change Quickie Thread
Thats kind of what I was concerned about, but I thought it might be workable anyways. What's the best way for ejectives to develop?Nortaneous wrote:Uh, probably not? Breathy and creaky voice are on opposite sides of modal voice.