Genitive relationships (WAS: Construct States))
|From:||Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, March 7, 1999, 18:06|
On Sun, 7 Mar 1999 14:18:50 +0000 "Raymond A. Brown"
>>I'm not sure what you mean by consonant mutations....from what i
>>i've seen, the changes that Gaelic consonants go through are much
>>extreme than Hebrew things like bege"d-kefe"t fricativization and the
>>different forms of the -t- in the _hitpa`eil_ paradigm.
>>Unless you're talking about something else?
>Plosives with or without 'dagesh lene'. When they are without dagesh
>are traditionally transliterated: ph, bh, th, dh, kh and gh; but with
>dagesh lene: p, b, t, d, k, g. This is reminiscent of the lenition
>Gaelic languages: 'soft' ph, bh, th, dh, ch, gh ~ 'hard' p, b, t, d,
>Indeed, it's my understanding that in the earliest form Gaelic the
>consonants were pronounced much the same way as, I'm told, the Yemeni
>still pronounce the Hebrew consonants without dagesh.
Ah, that's what i meant by _bege"d-kefe"t fricativization_. I guess what
you call "dagesh lene" is _dagesh qal_, then? That's how i learned
them....dagesh qal and dagesh hhazaq.
There are many different Yemenite accents, and not all of them are as
"phonetically correct" as straight plosive/fricative alternations. For
instance, one that the History of the Hebrew Language book i've mentioned
a few times talked about has [D] for <d> and [T] for <dh>, if i remember
And in the conlang world, my still-in-the-sketching-out-phase Judean
Romancelang, Judajajt, alternates
[p b t d k g] with
[P B s z x G], with [P] and [B] bilabial fricatives.
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]