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.
>
Actually, my inspiration for the way tones developed in Lumanesian
was NOT from Chinese or any other Asian language. Lumanesian tone
development was ultimately inspired by the mainland Scandinavian
languages. I'm not sure if there are parallels with how tones were
developed among the Chinese languages - though there could be.

I "discovered" how tones developed in Lumanesian when I realized
what the correspondences were between Danish words with the 'stoed'
(the suprasegmental glottal catch or glottalization) and
Swedish/Norwegian words with suprasegmental tone contours. In Danish
(especially the eastern dialects), glottalization of a syllable
final consonant seems to have the uncanny ability to superimpose a
creaky voiced near the end of the syllable. I realized that these
syllables are articulated with a rapid change in the
laryngealization of the syllable from a normal modal voice to a
creaky voice and finally to a complete glottal constriction. This
change in mode of voicing is reminiscent to the tone contours that
exist in Swedish/Norwegian syllables of equal/similar cognitive
distribution. I chose the Swedish model for Lumanesian and made such
superimposed glottalization correspond with a falling tone. For some
reason this makes more sense for Lumanesian languages. Thus,
Lumanesian words that historically ended with a consonant with a
stronger laryngeal (or glottal) constriction at the end of the word
developed falling tones or word melodies. Other words that had a
more relaxed laryngeal setting developed a more level tone or word
melody. All in all, there are two contrastive tones or word
melodies: falling and level - remarkably similar to Latvian (another
language that inspired Lumanesian phonology).

Regards,
-Kristian- 8-)