Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Lïzxvööse Verbs I: Active Tri-Consonantals

From:SMITH,MARCUS ANTHONY <smithma@...>
Date:Sunday, August 12, 2001, 6:22
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Thomas R. Wier wrote:

> The lengthening here is very normal when there is loss of some > kind. However, geminate consonants are basically defined by > a break in syllables lying between them.
This is not true. There are languages in this world that have word final geminates, which hardly spans a syllable break. Pima does this eg, hott 'send' (in Papago this is hotsh). There is also the word hottk 'swift'; And I have dim recollections of being told Estonian does as well, though I'm not so sure about this one. I would be rather surprised to see a word medial geminate that does not span a syllable boundary, but I suppose it is not completely impossible. That means that (if I
> understand your data aright) syllable breakdown would have to > be something like > > tatrzcaa [tAttDA:]: tAt.tDA: > tatrzcö [tAttDo]: tAt.tDo > tatrzcözxa [tAttDoZA]: tAt.tDo.ZA
If [tD] sequences are not permissible onsets, then the proper syllabification will be: tAtt.dA:, tAtt.Do, and tatt.Do.ZA. Given what I just said above, this is a fair feature in a conlang, and I wouldn't bet a fortune that it would never occur in a natlang. Marcus


Thomas R. Wier <artabanos@...>Lïzxvööse Verbs I: ActiveTri-Consonantals
BP Jonsson <bpj@...>[CONLANG] Lïzxvööse Verbs I: ActiveTri-Consonantals
Dan Seriff <microtonal@...>Lïzxvööse Verbs I: ActiveTri-Consonantals
Marcus Smith <smithma@...>Lïzxvööse Verbs I: ActiveTri-Consonantals