Re: Question about vowel harmono

> So . . .
>
> i.y     u
> e.oe    o
> ae   a
>
> That doesn't seem very balanced to me.
It would more be like this:

front:      y   oe   ae
neutral:      i    e
back:       u   o    a

which is basically what Finnish has; Hungarian doesn't have the /ae/, and
Turkish adds dotless-i to show /W/(?) the back counterpart to /i/

>
> Are there any other languages that use vowel harmony?  What about a
> close/open distinction instead of a front/back, so
>
> i, u, y would be close
> o, a, and e would be open
>
Interesting, tho I've never heard of any langs like this, tho that doesnt
mean they dont exist...

> I'm not sure I understand why there have to be correspondances between one
> set of vowels and the other.
>
Nor do I, and my native language has vowel harmony. I think basically its
for balance.

> If I have the word "isilyth" then the plural affix can be -il, but for
> "amon" it would have to be -al.  That seems reasonable to me.  (Or maybe
> -el -- it's more or less an aesthetic decision, seems to me; am I wrong?)
>
With the systems I'm familiar with, /-il/ (or even /-ael/) would go with
front vowels and /-al/ with back vowels; /-el/ being neutral could go with
either. Oftentimes the /-al/ /-ael/ suffix would have one meaning, /-el/
another...

-------ferko
Ferenc Gy. Valoczy

Free British Columbia!

Virtual Votia - Vaddjamaa Internetaza: http://www.geocities.com/uralica
railways page: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/3976/
25kV 50Hz: http://www.mp3.com/25kV50Hz

Reply