Re: Is this a realistic phonology?

On Sun, 7 Mar 1999, Raymond A. Brown wrote:

> At 3:26 am -0600 7/3/99, Tom Wier wrote:
> >Nik Taylor wrote:
> .......
> >> > >> [bb] is an implosive bilabial stop /`b/.
> >> > >> [z] is a voiceless alveolar click /t!/ (occasionally nasalized in lazy
> >> > speech).  It is an implosive alveolar stop /`d/ in some traditional
> >> > dialects.
> >>
> >> Hmm, you have phonemic implosives for bilabial and sometimes alveolar,
> >> but it's allophonic for velar?  Unlikely.
> >
>
> But the behavior of implosives are surely likely to more analogous to that
> of plosives. As far as I'm aware, implosion is more common for bilabial and
> dental/ alveolar sounds but palatal, velar and uvular implosives are
> certainly known.  But, like Nik, I find the scenario phonemic bilabial
> implosives,  alveolar implosives are phonemic in some dialects and that
> uvular (I assume that is what post-velar is) implosive is an allophonic
> variant of the uvular plosive before fromt vowels an unlikely scenario.
>
Ummmm :) The alveolar implosive is a dialectal variant of the alveolar
click. The post-velar ingressive is a whole 'nother sound (providing
the third in the series) ... Sorry if I wasn't clear 'bout that.


The hypothetical situation is this:  Originally there were (at least)
3 implosives (/'b/,/'d/, and /'q/).
/'b/ has remained implosive, /'d/ has become /t!/,/d~!/ in most
dialects (but remains /`d/ in a few), while /`q/ has been retained
initially before front vowels, but becomes /q/ when the vowels are closer
to it's point of articulation. Medially, it has become the almost
negligible /H/.
Is this realistic?

> And indeed Sahla did say that /r/ = [R] which I take to be the uvular r.
> If it is the uvular trill, then it can certainly be syllabic in a post- or
> inter-consonantal position.
It is post-velar, but is not a trill.  Kinda like the "er" in
Mid-Atlantic US "water", but much further back.  I could not see it being
a consonant, but?  So, then would [R} be the right symbol?

> While agreeing with Tom on this last point, I must say I by and large go
> along with Nik's comments generally.
>
> Ray.
>
Thanks y'all :)

 yasmin.