Re: a minimalist phonology

Henrik Theiling sikayal:

> I just *have* to add that since the thread is about minimalism, that
> *two* phonemes are the ultimate solution.
> [snip]
>
>   phoneme /0/:   [a] or [k]
>   phoneme /1/:   [1] or [n]
No, no, no.  If we're going to speak in binary we'd might as well make it
pronounceable, which means more allophones than that, since real binary is
liable to contain long strings of consecutive 1's and 0's.  And we don't
want it to be unbearably monotonous.  I'd suggest

phoneme /0/ = any front vowel or anterior consonant
phoneme /1/ = any back vowel or posterior consonant

All in free variation, of course.  Hence /10111001/ could be [kikxusyg] or
[opuNgRifa] or any number of other things.

The perfect lang for speaking to computers after they take over the world:
pronounceable by any speaker, small inventory, infinite renderability,
etc.

> Rubbish, isn't it? :-)  Just my word about minimalism. :-p
;-).  But I like minimal inventories for my artlangs--they're prettier.


Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu

"If you look at a thing nine hundred and ninety-nine times, you are
perfectly safe; if you look at it the thousandth time, you are in
frightful danger of seeing it for the first time."
--G.K. Chesterton