Re: [X] vs. [x]

From: "Paul Roser" <pkroser@...>

> I think you're right about East Caucasian in general - Agul is a special
> case - but Karbardian (and Adyghe) definitely makes the distinction (and
> also have labialized dorsals and a pharyngeal - /x, x^w, X, X^w, H/), and
I
> think that it is just one dialect of Abkhaz that makes the distinction,
but
> I don't have the info here at work.
>
> http://ee.www.ee/transliteration/pdf/Kabardian.pdf
You're right, it does. The source I had was incorrect, or I overlooked
something. The case with Circassian (Kabardian-Adyghe) is that /G/ and /x/
are found, but not /g/ and /k/ except in loanwords. (Ubykh likewise, and it
also lacked /k_>/ outside of loanwords from Circassian).

> In Cyrillic <x> is velar, <x>+<tvordij znak*> is uvular. I think the hard
> sign - the one that looks like a lower case b with a leftward serif - is
> tvordij znak, but it's been two decades or more since I actually studied
> Russian.
Considering the rarity of _tvjordnoje znak_ in Russian itself, the frequent
presence of the sign in any Cyrillic-written language, which is indeed
_mjaxkje znak_ "soft sign" with a leftward serif, is a strong signal that
one is dealing with a Caucasian language here. The conventions are as such:

g-hard sign = /R/ (rarely /G/)
k-hard sign = /q/
l-hard sign = /K/ (or /tK/)
x-hard sign = /X/

But Ossete uses this sign to indicate ejectivity; Caucasian uses something
resembling a capital I.

> You might be right, but I'd have to check. But it's not the case for all
> languages in that region - I believe Bella Coola/Nuxalk also has the
> distinction (Nater uses the symbols <c> and <x> for velar and uvular
> respectively).
That's odd; I would expect <c> to be used for /ts/; why not <ç> (c-cedilla)
for /x/, or <x> for /x/ and <x-caron> for /X/?

Reply