Re: Making your language sound nice

On 15/06/08 23:22:41, John Vertical wrote:

> Also, I wonder, why's everyone targetting the two-liquid pattern when
> his
> initial message said "chalal" is not bad? Perhaps the problem with
> "chalol"
> is actually the final /Ul/? I could see how that would, from an
> English
> background, seem a bit awkward, especially if the /l/ is [5] here.
> Possible
> solutions would include introducing a different pre-liquidic
> allophone
> for
> /OU/, maybe plain [O] (tho I can't tell if that would clash with
> another
> vowel phoneme), or expanding the suffix to something like /lA/ after
> a
> bimoraic (long) vowel (if /OU/ counts as such?) Or changing the
> suffix
> stacking order to yield /tSAlAlOU/. Or changing the whole suffix to
> something else. Etc. Sky's the limit.
Ironically from my English-speaking background, /O/ and /Ou\/ merge as
[Ou] before [5] (and to that can be added /a/ and /o:/ if certain
consonants follow the [5]).

--
Tristan "Deep down, every thread is a yaept" McLeay