Re: Is this a realistic phonology?

On Sun, 7 Mar 1999, Nik Taylor wrote:

> >  Well, the /p/ and /t/ are always aspirated, and the /d/ is usually
> > interdental.  The /d/ is sometimes devoiced [t]]. IOW, I'm not sure if
> > it'sthe voicing that's making the difference, or a combination of things.
> > Wouldn't this make a difference?
>
> Hmm, it might.
Thanks for making me put more thought into my analysis of why I pronounce
certain words different ways.  I think that the loss of aspiration is
based on relative syllable length in a "word", rather than the frontness
of the vowels.  The longer the preceeding syllable wrt to the /k + Vwl/
syllable, the less aspirated the /k/.  Does this make sense?
(However, the distance of the vowel from the /k/ may influence what I may
mistakenly hear as voicing?)

Well, not a linguist, I refuse to analyze it further :)  Is there a better
solution (like calling it a separate phoneme), or should I just leave it
alone?


> Hmm,  interesting.  So, it actually is an *inter*dental stop?  I know of
> no languages with interdental stops, but I guess they could exist.
It's easy to make! I'm surprised no other lanuages use it.  This and all
the labials and fricatives give the language a kind of "cute" sound :)
(perhaps babyish to an English speaker's ear.)

> > I read about a language somewhere (sorry 'bout lack of refs) that had
> > implosive /`b/ as an allophone of /b/ when it preceeded /e/.  I thought
> > that might work with /q/ alone?
>
> Really?  When it preceded */e/*?  That's a fascinating rule, I'd never
> have thought it possible that /e/ would determine implosiveness!
Gosh, I wish I could recall the source ...  Maybe later.  I think it was a
language spoken in Indonesia?

> Don't be afraid of being "too radical".  :-)  Some languages have
> bizarre diphthongs, I suspect that there are languages which can combine
> any vowels into diphthongs.  Old English, I think, had a lot of them.
Thanks :)

 yasmin.