Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: TERMS: Umlaut-Ablaut

From:Eric Christopherson <raccoon@...>
Date:Thursday, December 16, 1999, 2:19
> -----Original Message----- > From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU]On > Behalf Of Herman Miller > Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 9:43 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG > Subject: Re: TERMS: Umlaut-Ablaut
> On Sun, 14 Nov 1999 17:57:03 +0100, Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...> > wrote: > > >>I'm thinking that > >>having i- and a-umlaut may be more likely than having, say, > >>i- and u-umlaut, since those could confuse roots even more > >>(what is */mys/, << /misu/ or << /musi/)? > > > >Well, if you introduced a series of _unrounded_ back vowels you > could have > >both. /mys/ is more likely to be derived from /musi/, and /mMs/ > coul well > >be from /misu/. The lips keep in their original position - i.e. > rounded or > >unrounded, but the tongue has moved to the position of the lost > final vowel. > > That's exactly how Jarrda developed from Proto-Raccoon: e.g., "nuni" (to > study) > "nuen" [nyn], "ninu" (group) > "neun" [nMn].
I'm doing the same thing in Dhakrathat, but I'm not sure if diphthongs should work the same way, or different. I.e., I know I want u+i to become fronted u /y/, just as *muni would become *myn; but I'm not sure if i+u should also become /y/, or /M/ instead, like *minu > *mMn. My esthetics seem to lean to making them both front rounded, but I'm not sure if I should make diphthongs behave differently from umlaut. Does that make any sense? <grin>