Re: The Lumanesian is BACK!!!

Kristian wrote :

 The language is also definitely tonal and I have discovered that the
> Lumanesian languages were once none-tonal.
>
> I have constructed the outlines of how tone has developed from a none
> tonal language. Briefly, tonal distinctions developed when the
> contrast between two varying glottal strictures among consonants
> disappeared. It is not clear what these glottal strictures were but
> they were probably a contrast between either voiceless vs. voiced, or
> modal voiced vs. creaky (glottalized) voiced - (or an allophonic
> combination of both).
>
I'm sure you more learned than I am in this respect but just in case I thought,
well, maybe you could procure the explanations of how Chinese itself became
tonal. I read all that 10s of years ago (;-) and I can't find this book out
from my shelves but it's FASCINATING.

Mathias

-----
See the original message at http://www.egroups.com/list/conlang/?start=18280