Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: NATLANG: Gaidhlig volunteer needed

From:Michael Adams <michael.adams1@...>
Date:Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 20:34
b with a dot over it, was used years ago for BH, which
supposedly had a V sound, which is funny, since Greek, used to
have a B sound, but by the time the Cyrillic users got to it,
the B had become V.. So the need for a new B characters, why you
got the B and b (with a small tale off the top of the b
forwards) one being V and the other B..

Why this all funny, cause Celtic/Greek/Latin shared a common
history to a point until recent times, recent as in 300BC or
just before then. Also Irish/British (Bretons)  had contact with
the East, namely the Copts and others for a while, you can see
it in their religious ideals, religious art and more..


Address changing to or       My Poetry List   My Humor List       My Friends List    Grunts
Past/Present/Future    Magic or Super
High Tech  Where we are
going as a species
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: NATLANG: Gaidhlig volunteer needed

> On 3/21/06, Elliott Lash <erelion12@...> wrote: > > > > Thanks! > > > > Are lenited |bh| and |mh| really [v]? Not [B]? > > > I really do think they're [v] in Scottish Gaelic. > > Ok. Were they historically [B], maybe? The use of bilabial
> for a labiodental sound just seems a little odd. > > > In any event, <mh> sometimes nasalizes the surrounded
> > Interesting! So the underlying nasality carries over even
though the
> sound itself isn't nasal by the time it's pronounced. > > > > Is there a convention concerning which superscript goes
> > > > I think that the superscript <h> would precede the > > <j>, but I might be biased due to my Indo-European > > knowledge. > > Hm? Why would IE knowledge bias you one way or the other? > > I could see it going either way, logically. The aspiration
> before any audible sound that could be said to be palatalized,
but the
> tongue is probably in the palatal position even before the
> . . . > > > > What the heck is a "velarized dental" (e.g. broad single
initial unlenited |l| and |n|)?
> > > How do you do that with your tongue?? > > > Aren't they dark-l and dark-n? Like the <l> (in my > > dialect) in <look>. They're written with a tilde > > through the L and N. > > Oh! Is that all they are? The description I read explicity
said that
> the sounds DIDN'T exist in English, so I assumed there was
> stranger than [5] going on. Grr. > > I definitely distinguish the two /l/'s in my 'lect, but I
don't quite
> feel how the dark one is "velarized". My tongue isn't in
> like the position it's in for velars. But whatever, that
> muchly. > > (BTW, in CXS, the IPA "tilde-through" diacritic is spelled _e,
> those sounds are [l_e] and [n_e]. However, [l_e] is more
> written with its own symbol, [5]). > > Thanks again! > > > -- > Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>


Keith Gaughan <kmgaughan@...>