Laminated affricates? :-)

Recently, I've noticed that Ebisedian actually has several allophones for
its palatoalveolar fricatives and affricates. The underlying cause is that
[s] and [z] are realized as laminal [s] and laminal [z] under certain
circumstances.  I guess the question is, am I right in understanding what
"laminal" means?  Basically it's an alveolar/postalveolar fricative, but
with the blade of the tongue rather than the tip.

When in isolation, /s/ is [s] and /z/ is [z]; but when occuring in the
palatoalveolar affricates, you get [dz_m] and [ts_m] more often than the
"official" [dZ] and [tS] that I describe in the Ebisedian grammar. In
particular, if there are closed rounded vowels nearby, the affricates
become laminated. ;-) Eg.:

        /julir/ (house) = [dz_mu"lir`]
        /jyy'i/ (portal) = ["dz_my:?i]
        /chy'i/ (poison) = ["s_my?i]
        /miCi'/ (therefore) = [mi"ts_mi]

whereas if the vowels were more open, the affricates become apical(?):
        /j0'pi/ (to sit) = ["dZApi]
        /chasi'd/ (illness) = [Sa"sid]
        /Cepadui'/ (maternal grandparent) = [tS&padu"?i]

Of course, as far as phonemes go, the laminal [s] is allophonic with [S],
and the laminal [z] is allophonic with [Z]; but apical [s] and [z] are
definitely distinct phonemes from their laminal counterparts.

Does any of this make any sense? :-)


T

--
IBM = I'll Buy Microsoft!

Reply