Re: Blah blah blah natlangs

On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 10:06:53AM -0500, Thomas R. Wier wrote:
> Muke Tever wrote:
>
> > >===== Original Message From Constructed Languages List
> > >>     My idiolect definitely has [j{] (or [j&] depending on your favored
> > >> transcription system), but the actual phonetic realization might be
> > >> something else, just because speakers of other dialects usually insist
> > >> that my /{/ is not [{]. If this is so, I don't know what exactly it is.
> > >
> > >I usually have [j{]; some of my friends, however, use [jE] -- but,
> > >interestingly, seem sometimes to epenthesize a glottal stop:  [jE?].
> >
> > Isn't that "yep" ?
>
> No, that's the funny thing:  it's distinctly *not* "yep".  But it does
> seem reasonable that [jE?] was the immediate ancestor of "yep".
Justin told me not long ago that a professor of his said that /noup/
probably came from */nou?/; I'm not sure if I should think the /p/ in <yep>
is analogical to <nope>, or if -/p/ is just a common outcome for /?/ (I've
been under the assumption that the roundedness of the /o/ helped make it /p/
instead of e.g. /k/ or /t/).

This is something I've rarely if ever read about though when reading on
sound changes; that is to say, a glottal stop becoming another stop. Does it
ever happen in "normal" circumstances (by which I mean that <yep>/<yup> and
<nope> are kind of slangy interjections, so maybe they don't follow all the
rules other kinds of words do)?

--
Eric Christopherson, a.k.a. Contrarian Conlanger Rakko ^_^