Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: DECAL: Examples #3: Phonological change rules (Modified by Tristan McLeay)

From:Tristan McLeay <conlang@...>
Date:Friday, January 14, 2005, 5:36
On 14 Jan 2005, at 8.18 am, Sai Emrys wrote:

My apologies for sending this straight to you! My brain doesn't pay
enough attention as it should! I wish Gmail would start being normal
for a change.

Either that or something's up with my mailer---hopefully this time it
goes where it should.

> Same deal.
This one's harder and may not be entirely complete---I stopped conlanging for a while (uni) and have been focussing on nouns since I restarted; when writing down inflected forms I don't have rigid rules and don't mind finding some irregularities. I reckon it gives the language quality (aesthetic reasons, then :). This *doesn't* include changes from Common Germanic to Ancient Føtisk, nor AF to OF, excepting when they're still relevant to present process.
> Try to use /UR/->[SR] / X_# type rules (e.g. /C/ -> [-vd C] / [-vd C] > _ ) (# = word boundary). > > Q1: What are your *phonologically driven* sound change rules? I.e., > these will apply to *all* situations, once higher-level UR processes > are done (e.g., morphology). Be sure to include the order of > application, if it's relevant (e.g., you have feeding). This includes > cases that are caused by word boundaries, syllable boundaries, cluster > conflicts (e.g. VC + CV in a CVCV limit), etc.
Ancient Føtisk: No more than one fricative (doesn't apply over word boundaries): [fricative] -> [stop] / _[fricative'] Unless [fricative] is /s/, when: [fricative'] -> [stop] / s_ Where [stop] is the voiceless stop at the same POA. (Note that in the application of this rule, /k/ is sometimes the stop for /f/--- it is thus likely that another process, x -> f occurs in conditions in conditions I haven't fully worked out.) Voicing must agree (regressive assimilation) (probably applies over word boundaries): [-vd C] -> [+vd C] / _[+vd C'] Except word initially, when: [+vd C'] -> [-vd C] / #[-vd C]_ [+vd C] -> [-vd C] / _[-vd C'] Unless [+v C] has no voiceless counterpart (though here a voiceless allophone is likely) b -> v / [vowel]_[vowel'] f -> v / [vowel]_[vowel'] Both unstable and/or irregularly included in the orthography. Old Føtisk --- Only regressive devoicing assimilation and VV -> V / _CC so far.
> Q2: Ditto - but for *morphophonology* or otherwise non-general cases. > E.g., the prefix in- for English (-> r, l, m by context) - it only > applies to that morpheme, not generally AFAIK. Again, include order of > application.
AF: d -> v in some inflected forms g -> j in some inflected forms g -> dZ in some inflected froms /ng/ [Ng] -> /n/ [n] in some inflected forms AF & OF: g -> v in some inflected forms x -> f in some derivatives e, i, 2, y -> a, e, &\, 2 in some inflected forms and derivatives o, u -> Q, o (ditto) u, o, A, Q -> y, 2, &, &\ (ditto) Vn -> VV / _[fricative] in some inflected forms (some more too that I have worked out/can't remember etc.) OF: VVC and VCC alternations in some inflected forms dZs -> tS (a marginal phoneme)
> Q3: Motivation, again? (If anything other than purely aesthetic, or > you can give details of why you think your choices made for better > aesthetics.)
d -> v was because I wanted an ancient Germanic language that did something more interesting to its [T] and [D]. VVC/VCC alternations are from the intended Scandinavian influence, again. But for everything else it was on a whim (or rather, it's based on processes that were decided on a whim) or occasionally for nice germanicness. -- Tristan.