Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Date:Friday, January 21, 2000, 16:39
At 08:53 20/01/00 -0500, you wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:38:41 +0100, Christophe Grandsire ><Christophe.Grandsire@...> wrote: > >Do you mean e. g. pla#'na#'ro#'ia -> /p_ja/ ? >
Of course not! :) I forgot to say that all the N must be of the same kind in this rule (all V or all L, but not a mix of them).
>Are surface sequences like /laja/ or /rana/ allowed at all? >
Yes, inside words (/laja/ would be written -'la'ia-, with the hyphens meaning that there are other syllables around) and at word frontiers. It's one of the cases when V is not elided at the end of a word, when it's preceeded by a L.
> >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.)? >
I think I'll go with the complementary distribution :) . I did it already with 's' in another of my languages (it could be pronounced /s/, /z/, /S/ or /Z/), and now I do it for 'n'. I generally like those kinds of features :) .
><...> >> 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 have no difficulty pronouncing /jl=/ different from /Jl=/, so I may not see your difficulty. Of course, it must be a weak point of the system, but all phonetic/emic systems in natlangs are full of that, and that's what makes evolution possible, at least in the domain of sound. I may have a dialect of it which makes no difference between /j/ and /J/, and between /j_0/ and /C/. Of course, what I'm showing you right now is the 'pure' language, the one which is said to be the 'high standard' (if there is any, and if there's not, than I consider it to be my high standard, from which I will work on the actually pronounced forms). Dialectical differences are always possible.
>I like it ever more! >
Thanks! Now that this part is done, I will work more on the grammar now. The next post will show you a sketch of what I've thought about for the noun classes, and maybe a few other things, like the culture associated to this language (as far as I know, it will be a rather advanced shamanistic/animistic culture, certainly in an alternative time-line). Christophe Grandsire |Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G. "Reality is just another point of view." homepage :