Re: another newbie
|From:||David Barrow <davidab@...>|
|Date:||Monday, November 25, 2002, 0:07|
Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> En réponse à David Barrow <davidab@...>:
> > Hi all
> > I'm another newbie.
> Welcome then! :)
> My interest veers more towards modifying languages
> > languages rather than constructing them from scratch.
> They are called "A posteriori" languages. Brithenig, Hattic (it's a language
> based on Indo-European, right Jan?), my Narbonósc and so many others are
> examples of that.
I'll have a look sometime
> I call them what
> > if... languages in the sense of what would happen or have happened if
> > certain changes to the languages happen in the future,or had or hadn't
> > happened in the past, for example an English that hadn't lost most of
> > its inflexions and had kept grammatical gender or an English without
> > Norse, Norman, French, Latin influence, but instead had kept the
> > original Anglo-Saxon vocabulary but had still undergone the sound
> > changes modern English went through (such as gws)
> I know there's been a few projects like that. Englisc anyone?
> Or inflected
> > languages
> > such as Spanish, French, German with their inflexions reduced to a
> > level
> > like that of English or even further
> My Reman is basically a Romance language gone the way of English ;))) : few
> inflections (a plural for nouns, as well as remnants of a genitive case, a few
> more inflections for verbs), an invariable definite article, not indefinite
> article, natural rather than grammatical gender, etc...
I went to your website. When I clicked on the languages it said under construction
Sure you are not confusing British and American pronunciations. I hear similarity
between English /Q/ and Spanish /o/ and I speak both languages quite fluently.I
have lived here in Peru since I was 5 You say your dialect no longer has the
distinction /a/ and /A/ which is the American pronunciation
> > Anyone else interested in modified languages? I speak English and
> > Spanish so my interest centres mainly around these two
> Well, you'll see that here a posteriori languages are quite common, and quite
> liked :)) .
> > clod = /klQd/ looking at the sampa page at
> > http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/home.htm
the only other language
> > I
> > can see with this Q symbol is Danish: kors, though I suppose it's
> > similar to the /o/ of Spanish toro or French gros (examples from the
> > SAMPA page) but shorter and more open
> It's actually like /a/, but pronounced in the back of your mouth and rounded.
> > clod = /klAd/ similar to a in French pâte? or Danish pakken?
> Yes, in dialects that kept the distinction between /a/ and /A/ (I'm talking
> about French here ;)) ). My dialect lost this distinction during my youth, so I
> remember making it when I was ten but don't anymore :)) . At least I still
> recognise the difference, and that's quite helpful for my Dutch :))) .
And merged to which of the two? or did a new vowel emerge?
> > Looking at the SAMPA page:
> > BrE has /e/ in pet AmE has /E/, but then the American page uses the
> > same
> > /e/ for raise does that mean Americans pronounce raid the same way I
> > pronounce red? Or has someone made a mistake?
> No. If I understood correctly Americans often pronounce ay as [e].
but southern English red and American raid are not homophones surely
> rest snipped