Re: THEORY: Allophones

Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> wrote:
> FFlores wrote:
> > Maybe you're right and I'm confusing the terms. I guess
> > I'm trying to make a distinction between syllable-final
> > /w/ (that *does* exist) and syllable-final /v/ realized
> > as [w]. I mean, if you have two roots /tav/ and /taw/
> > and you use them as words, both are pronounced [taw],
> > but if you inflect them by adding /es/ you have [taves]
> > and [tawes] respectively.
>
> Hmm ... reminds me of German obstruents, which are devoiced when
> word-final, but when you add a suffix the difference re-appears.  I'd
> still call that a phonetic transformation, /v/ --> /w/ when
> syllable-final.
>
Yes, it's definitely it. In Curco I'm trying to eliminate
stops from final position, so I decided having /p, b, v/
becoming /w/ there (/b/ becomes /v/ after a vowel, so anyway
that's how it would end). Then I'll make them reappear when
some suffixes are added, except in some words where I might
regularize them and always use /w/. I'm making the language
more analytic, often losing the number distinction, so it
should be easy to keep words in their root form with /w/.


--Pablo Flores

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 The Universe is not user friendly.
                                     Kelvin Throop