Re: Nonpulmonic conlang?

Ray Brown wrote:
>>
>>I can imagine something like a Salishan (?) or other NW Coast
>>Amerindian language (using some of your symbols)-- [p'ts'tl'xk']
>>meaning maybe 'the canoe is going downstream' or whatever ;-))))
>>though I don't know how long one could carry one like that, as, basically,
>>it involves holding one's breath :-))
>
>Yep - which rather limits the length of an utterance and, indeed, would
>make meaningful communication somewhat difficult for those with
>breathing problems.
>
>Presumably the syllabic nucleus of the above is the vocoid */l'/ (or is
>|tl| a lateral affricate?) -
Yes, that was what I meant. Knoweldge of CXS abandoned me for a while.
Similarly my [ts], an affricate.

And IIRC, "pi_cch_u" as in Machu Picchu is supposed to be an ejective too,
though I suspect only local Quechuas or Aymaras pronounce it correctly.

but my understanding is that an
>approximant,
>even a lateral approximant, cannot be ejective.
That is true.
>
>Ejective (i.e. glottalic egressive) consonants are normally stops, tho
>ejective fricative are, I'm told, attested in some languages.
And voiceless, of course.  I think some of the NW Coast languages have
ejective [s'] and perhaps [x'] and maybe others (voiceless [l]-ejective??),
if I recall my reading in the Boaz/Sapir et al analyses published way back
in the early 20th C.