Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Palatalization

From:Danny Wier <dawiertx@...>
Date:Wednesday, April 14, 2004, 5:03
Whoops, I sent that to you privately, James, and that was supposed to go to
the list.

From: "James Worlton" <jworlton@...>

> t_j and c > d_j and J\ > > emindahken has some palatalized consonants and I am trying to find the > most efficient way to represent them phonetically. Personally, the two > examples seem to me like they should be identical. If anyone can explain > the differences (however subtle) I would appreciate it.
I have a set of palatal-type sibilants in Tech, but I'm not sure whether they should be palatized alveolars or alveolopalatals. What's the difference, really? For Common Slavic c-acute, I see /ts_j/ in one language, /ts\/ in another, and /c/ in still another. I know a true palatal is different than a palatized alveolar.... Anyway, the 'hissing' consonant phonemes in question, when latinized: z-acute: /dz_j/ or /dz\/ c-acute: /ts_j/ or /ts\/ c-acute-apostrophe: /ts_>_j/ or /ts\_>/ s-acute: /s_j/ or /s\/ (I also have postalveolar and retroflex distinction for 'hushing' consonants, but that's another issue.) It is also possible in my conlang to have a palatized alveolar nasal /n_j/ and a palatal nasal /J/, as well as a palatized alveolar lateral /l_j/ and a palatal lateral /L/. In non-careful speech this distinction might be lost, however.