Re: Euphonic phonology (Was: 'Nor' in the World's Languages)

On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 04:19:30PM -0600, Dirk Elzinga wrote:
[...]
> I think that a strict segregation of morphology and phonology is
> probably a mistake in lg creation, whatever your analytical
> predilections are.
Wow, this has got to be one of those gems of insight that make it
worthwhile to be on CONLANG. :-)


> For me, most of the interest in morphology is in its interaction with
> phonological forms. Stuff like ablaut, mutation, root-and-pattern
> inflection, and reduplication depend heavily on the phonological
> makeup of the language. If you have a morphology you like (that is,
> you make distinctions among categories you think are interesting and
> useful) look at making the morphology more dependent on the sound
> structure of words--try out some ablaut, mutation, etc to liven up
> both the phonology and morphology.
[...]

That's a very good idea. I think I should look into the phonological
interactions of Tatari Faran's morphology. Right now, much of it in TF
is still rather dry. Thinking over the idea in the context of natlangs,
though---it is very true that morphology is heavily tied to phonology,
and the two interact with each other in very interesting ways. I should
keep that in mind next time---I have a tendency to over-analyse and
compartmentalize things, which isn't always the best idea.


T

--
The best compiler is between your ears. -- Michael Abrash