Re: Itakian - Yes, I chose that name :)

On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:38:41 +0100, Christophe Grandsire
<Christophe.Grandsire@...> wrote:

<...>
>3. C#N(_0) -> CN
>   CN(N')#(N'')N''' -> CNN'''
>
>4. CL -> CL= / -C or -#
>   #L -> #L= / -C or -#
>   LL' -> LL'= / -C or -#
Do you mean e. g. pla#'na#'ro#'ia -> /p_ja/ ?

Are surface sequences like /laja/ or /rana/ allowed at all?

<...>
>
>7. VV -> V:
>   L(=)C ->L(=)C_v
>   CL= -> C_vL=
>
>   NOTE: those last two rules voice the actual consonnants, whether they
>correspond to deep phonemes or they have been modified by 6.
>
>The last rule of 7. is difficult to explain by a simple law of
>transformation. It says simply that the actual pronunciation of 'n'
>(whether it is syllabic, voiceless or voiced) greatly depends on its
>environment. The following hierarchy says which part of its environment
>influences exactly this nasal:
>following consonnant > preceeding consonnant > following vowel > preceeding
>vowel (the liquids have no effect on it)
>If the influent part is a consonnant, 'n' simply takes the PoA of the
>consonnant. If it's a vowel, 'n' stays the same with 'a', becomes /m/ with
>'e' and /N/ with 'o'.
>
Again, if this rule is put last, then /m/ and /n/ seem to be in
complementary distribution. But from your previous post I had the
impression that this is not the case *on the surface*.

Maybe, the 'consonant assimilation' works here, whereas 'vowel coloring'
goes before elision (thus allowing surface sequences like /ma/, /Ne/,
etc.)?

<...>
>        With all those rules, you have the following distribution of
surface phones:
>V: a  e  o
>   a: e: o:
>L: m   n   N   l   r   j   w
>   m_0 n_0 N_0 l_0 r_0 j_0 w_0
>   m=  n=  N=  l=  r=  i   u
>C: p   t   k   ?   P   s   x   h
>   p_m t_n k_N     P_m s_n x_N
>   p_l t_l k_l     P_l s_l x_l
>   p_w t_w k_w     P_w s_w x_w
>   p_j t_S k_C     P_j S   C
>   b   d   g       B   z   G
>   b_m d_n g_N     B_m z_n G_N
>   b_l d_l g_l     B_l z_l G_l
>   b_w d_w g_w     B_w z_w G_w
>   b_j d_Z g_J     B_j Z   J
>
I thought once more about the distinction between /i/ and /J/, and I saw
a difficulty here again. I can imagine syllables like /jl=/ with
very tense spirant /j/ only. So it seems that the place of articulation
should differ. E. g. /J/: front velar, /G/: back velar, /j/ (= i):
palatal.

I like it ever more!

Basilius