Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Vowel Harmony Asthetically Pleasing?

From:Adam F. <hypaholic@...>
Date:Wednesday, December 29, 2004, 6:50
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:23:45 +0000, Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:

>On Sunday, December 26, 2004, at 10:25 , Joe wrote: > >> # 1 wrote: >> >>> Adam F. wrote: >>> >>>> I am looking for opinions. Who finds vowel harmony in general to be >>>> asthetically pleasing and what do you think of my sketch? >[snip] > >>> It seems to be harmonic except the "a[A]" that is the only unrounded >>> vowel >>> of your back vowels, >>> >>> It is a little out of the harmony compared with the others of its group >>> >>> >> >> Indeed. I'd add a rounded front group and an unrounded back group: > >OK - but why must Adam ape the Turkish type of vowel harmony? It is not by >any means the only sort of vowel harmony found in natlangs. > >> Rounded front: >> ü[y], ö[2], (å with umlaut, perhaps?)[&\] > >Yes, I was forgetting in my previous mail that Finnish vowel harmony >concerns the _rounded_ high and mid vowels as well as the unrounded low >vowels. The high & mid unrounded front vowels are neutral as regards vowel >harmony. > >But Adam was asking about his scheme - it seems quite naturalistic to me. > >> Rounded back: >> u[u], o[o], å[Q] >> >> Unrounded back: >> ì[M], è[7], a[A] > >Which would give Jo a scheme like the Turkish, but with three vowel levels >in each series instead of two. But then we would lose Adam's central >vowels - and I rather like them :) > >Ray
It seems to me that natural is often less logical than we want it to be. I am of course still taking into account all of the feedback. Thanks you guys. Adam