Re: Labialized consonants (was Re: Some Zitwbata text)

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:50:24 +0200, Y.Penzev <isaacp@...> wrote:

[...]
>How funny... I've got the same idea. Only dentals and velars can be
>labialized (or palatalized).
>e.g. {bat} [pat] 'vessel' :: {batw} [pat_w] 'land'
OK for labialized, but...

Strictly speaking, "palatalized" velars seem phonetically impossible. The
two articulations, palatal and velar, are too close to each other, so what
you get should be accurately termed "front velar" or "back palatal".

Dentals, too, tend to change their place of articulation when palatalized
(unless something very special prevents them from that). So you'll
probably end up having simply five independent series: bilabial, dental,
alveopalatal, front velar, back velar.

The quality of "palatalized" seems to be a pretty morphonological thing -
*except* with palatalized labials (which, BTW, are anthropophonically the
easiest category of palatalized sounds - before vowels, at any rate).


Basilius

Reply