Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Would this consonant distribution be realistic?

From:Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Date:Saturday, October 5, 2002, 17:50
En réponse à Steven Williams <feurieaux@...>:

> > Labials - [p], [m], [f], [v], [w]
Or you refering to actual phones or to phonemes? If you are referring to actual phones, then [f] and [v] are labiovelar rather than labial ([p\] and [B] are the X-SAMPA labial fricatives). And if you are referring to phonemes, then you should you slashes // rather than brackets [].
> Alveolars - [t], [d], [n], [s], [l] > Palatals - [c], [J], [n_j], [l_j], [j] > Velars - [k], [g] > Uvulars - [R\] (I'm thinking about adding [q] and > possibly [q_v], whatever the symbol for a voiced > uvular stop would be in X-SAMPA)
It's [G\] (small capital G in IPA).
> Glottals - [?] (allophonically either [?\] or [?_h > (VERY aspirated - pronounced a bit like a gasp)] in > the initial position in most dialects) > > Please note the loss of the voicing contrast between > the labial stops - historically, [b] shifted to [v]. > Is it realistic to have the only voicing contrast in > fricatives to be held in the labials, rather than the > alveolars?
Well, a few asymmetries are no problem. No phonetic system is perfectly symmetric anyway. Does this violate any universals that I
> should worry about, or should I simply not worry about > universals and just have a merry old time with my > beautifully asymmetrical phonetic chart? >
I'd say just go ahead. I see nothing really worrying in your system. Christophe. http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.