----- Original Message -----
From: Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
To: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 1999 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: THEORY: Semivowels
> Eric Christopherson wrote:
> > Also, I tend to have problems pronouncing palatals, so I usually
pronounce
> > Spanish <=F1> (n-tilde) by nasalizing the previous vowel and using [j=
]
instead
> > of the palatal nasal; thus <a=F1o> [a~jo] rather than the correct
> > pronunciation of [aJo]. It sounds pretty much the same to me though.
> Really? Interesting. To me, they sound quite distinct. I wonder if
> you're nasalizing the /j/? So that you're making [a~j~o], because [j~]
> and [J] sound, to me, similar.
Yeah, I think I do nasalize the /j/, but I neglected to say that.
> > In my conlang Dhakrathat, nasalized vowels before the semivowels caus=
e
the
> > semivowels to be nasalized too, causing them later to change to nasal=
s,
i.e.
> > /a~w/ -> /aw~/ -> /am/, /a~j/ -> /aj~/ -> /aJ/.
> Cool. Are the vowels still nasalized in /am/ and /aJ/? That is, are
> they [a~m] and [a~J]?
No, nasalization of vowels drops out in that point of the language.
According to my current plan, /J/ goes forward to /n/.