Re: Phonetics Question

On Mon, 4 Jan 1999 19:17:35 -0600 Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> writes:
>Steg Belsky wrote:
>> _zh_/_jh_ (/Z/)
>Were these originally two different sounds that collapsed into one
>sound?
Nope, they've always been the same sound, it's just a difference in the
spelling, depending on whether the sound comes from a Z or from a J.  In
less-clear instances, it's based on whether the sound it comes from came
from farther in the front or farther in the back of the mouth from the
/Z/ sound.

For instance, verb-noun roots are made into "doer nouns" by a process
called "softening of the final consonant".  (it's technically an
absorbtion of an original final _dh_ /D/)
And both _j_ and _z_ soften into /Z/.

_waj_ /w a dZ/ "settle(ment)" >>> _wajh_ /w a Z/ "settler"

_waz_ /w a z/ "make/do/action" >>> _wazh_ /w a Z/ "maker"

Making _wajh_ and _wazh_ homophones.  _wazh_ is a much rarer word, so
it's very unusual that there could be any ambiguity.

Btw, the affricatives /dZ/, /tS/, and /ts/ are considered single sounds
in Rokbeigalmki, but /dz/ is not - it's pronounces as "one and a half"
syllables with what i think is an ultrashort shwa between the /d/ and the
/z/.  That's also why there are individual letters for the first three,
but /d(@)z/ is written with two letters.


-Stephen (Steg)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]