Re: two related languages

On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:57:22 -0500 Roger Mills <romilly@...> writes:

> > a       b       c       d
> >pod     pat     fod     fat (1)
> >bak     peg     veg     vek (2)
> >pet     bit     pit     fid (3)
> >bod     bad     bot     vad (4)
> >
> Prompted by Eamon Graham's reply, I took another look at this.
> Assuming no
> borrowing, you have 4 consonant correspondences in initial and
> final
> position--
> 1.ppff -- 2.bpvv -- 3.pbpf --- 4.bbbv which with reasonable
> confidence I'd
> call--
> 1.*ph -- 2.*bh -- 3.*p -- 4.*b
> language a merges aspirates and plain, retains voice contrast
> language b merges aspirates > plain,voiceless;  merges plain >
> voiced (odd)
> lang. c  retains the 4-way distinction, though with phonetic change
> to
> aspirates.
> lang d retains voice contrast but merges voiceless > plain, voiced >
> plain,
> and all > fricative
exactly correct

> The finals are another matter.
> 1.dtdt -- 2.kggk -- 3.tttd -- 4.ddtd
> 1."*d1"--2. *g ---  3.*t (?)-- 4. "*d2"
1. th
2. g
3. t
4. dh

> *d1 might be plain /d/, *d2 might be /dh/???.   3.*t is odd, in that
> voiceless finals don't usually voice, in my experience.  One would
> expect at
> least one of the *d's to parallel *g, so you'd expect a **dttd set.
> (Or are
> there constraints on what final can follow an initial, a la IE?
> Perhaps I
> havent looked hard enough......)
> It would help if we knew whether there was also a **th; as it
> stands, the
> various langs. don't _seem_ to merge finals the same way as
> initials....(Standard Disclaimer: Needs more data/research)
> .
no constraints, there was a th (1), and they don't merge the finals the
same way as initials.

> There are three vowel correspondences:
> l,4. oaoa --2. aeee -- 3. eiii  probably
> *a or *o --    *e  ---  *i
> (a rather odd system-- is that the whole thing???)
a - e - i
yep.

Robert Wilson
http://kuvazokad.free.fr/
Yessessë Eru ontanë Menel ar Cemen.
Yessessë ëa Quetta ar Quetta né as Eru ar Eru né Quetta.