Re: [X] vs. [x]

Danny Wier wrote at 2004-03-26 10:28:29 (-0600)
 > From: "Paul Roser" <pkroser@...>
 >
 > > In addition to Yupik, Inupiaq, Nivkh, and Kabyle (Berber) that Danny
 > > mentioned, the Siberian language Itelmen and many, if not all, of the
 > > Caucasian languages make a distinction between velar and uvular
 > > fricatives, and a few also have pharyngeals as well. Burkiqan Agul (sp?)
 > > has, if I recall correctly, velar, uvular, epiglottal, and pharyngeal
 > > fricatives, which is probably the most distinguished by any one language.
 >
 > I checked the data I have (mostly found online) on North Caucasian - Ubykh
 > did have velar and uvular fricatives, but the eleven other languages I know
 > of (Abkhaz, Abaza, Adyghe, Kabardian, Chechen, Ingush, Avar, Lak, Dargwa,
 > Lezgian, Tabasaran) don't make the distinction; the fricatives are all
 > uvular. I did see something on Agul somewhere having all those guttural
 > fricatives; wasn't it the UPSID survey?
 >
 > Squamish, a Salishan language, has /x_w/, /X/ and /X_w/, but not /x/. I
 > think this is the case for most languages in that family.

It appears most Salish languages have uvular, labialised uvular and
labialised velar series as above, and in addition either a velar
(/k_>/, /k/, /x/) or postalveolar (/tS_>/, /tS/, /S/) series.  So
those with the velar series, like Okanagan* have both /x/ and /X/.

Such a contrast appears to be fairly common in the NW Coast
sprachbund - in addition to the languages Paul Roser mentioned, it's
present in Nuuchahnuulth and Makah (Southern Wakashan), which I've
been reading about lately, and in the Coosan, Chinookan and Chimakuan
familes (that I've checked in Mithun's _Languages of Native North
America_).

*http://www.umt.edu/ling/resources/Okanagan and Salish Languages.pdf