NATLANG: Phonotactics

Bunch of questions:

(1) What's a good book on phonotactics likely to be available and accessible
to me?

(2) Around what fraction of natlangs have syllable-onsets and around what
fraction don't?

(3) Around what fraction of natlangs have syllable-codas and around what
fraction don't?

(4) Of languages that have syllable-onsets, around what fraction have onset-
clusters and around what fraction don't?

(5) Of languages that have syllable-codas, around what fraction have coda-
clusters and around what fraction don't?

(6) Among languages that have both onsets and codas, and also have
clusters, around what fraction only have onset-clusters, or only have coda-
clusters? And around what fraction have both onset-clusters and coda-
clusters?

(7) Among languages that have onset-clusters, around what fraction have
three-or-more-consonant onset-clusters, and around what fraction limit onset-
clusters to two consonants?

(8) Among languages that have coda-clusters, around what fraction have
three-or-more-consonant coda-clusters, and around what fraction limit coda-
clusters to two consonants?

------------------------

ObConLang; Whose and which conlangs have what syllable-structures?

AFMCL: I have (C)(C)V(V)(C)(C)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Different bunch of questions.

(a) "Action-at-a-distance".  Greenberg's article seems to indicate that there's
little interaction between non-consecutive sounds, _except_ when they're all
part of the same _root_ morpheme.  He says many languages don't allow, or at
least disprefer, certain pairs of highly-similar phonemes to both occur in the
same root, even if they're not consecutive, and even if they do occur
consecutively within words otherwise than within the same root.  Examples he
gives include; a language none of whose roots contain both a /s/ and a /S/;
and Semitic languages which disprefer homorganic consonants in the same
root, even though homorganic pairs are common elsewhere.

Is that all true?

Is the "liquid counter-harmony" in Spanish an example?  Spanish seems to
follow a "rule" (well, mostly) that two liquids in a root can't both be rhotics and
can't both be "lambdics" (lateral liquids).  (Or am I all wet there?)

(b) How common is it for languages to have clusters that never occur except
across a morpheme-boundary?

(c) Greenberg says that if C1C2 occurs as an onset cluster, then either C1 or
C2 must occur as a single-consonant onset; if C1C2C3 occurs as an onset
cluster, then either C1C2 or C2C3 must occur as a two-consonant onset
clustere; if C1C2C3C4 occurs as an onset-cluster, then either C1C2C3 or
C2C3C4 must occur as a three-consonant onset-cluster; etc.  And, similarly
for codas.

Is that true?

He also says, that _usually_, if C1C2 occurs as an onset, then _usually_
_both_ C1 _and_ C2 occur as single-consonant onsets; and if C1C2C3 occurs
as an onset, then _usually_ _both_ C1C2 _and_ C2C3 occur as two-consonant
onset-clusters; and so on, and the same for codas.

What, exactly, does "usually" mean here? "The overwhelming majority of
languages with such clusters"? "The overwhelming majority of clusters in that
language"? "The overwhelming majority of consonants in that language"?

(d) How are onset-clusters related to coda-clusters and vice-versa?  For
instance, in languages with both onset-clusters and coda-clusters, if two
consonants occur consecutively as one margin of the syllable, and each
occurs by itself as the opposite margin of a syllable, are they likely to occur
together, in one order or the other, at that opposite margin?

That is, if, in a language with both onset-clusters and coda-clusters, if C1C2
is an onset, and both C1 and C2 are codas, is it highly probable that either
C1C2 or C2C1 occurs as a coda?  And if C1C2 is a coda, and both C1 and C2
are onsets, is it highly probable that either C1C2 or C2C1 is an onset?

(e) Borrowing.
Suppose a language wants to borrow a word with, for instance, C1C2C3 as,
for instance, an onset-cluster; but the language currently contains no such
onset-cluster.  Under what circumstances are its speakers likely to borrow the
word without breaking up or modifying the foreign cluster?
For instance, if they do have C1C2, C2C3, and C1C3 in their language already,
and do have three-consonant onset clusters in their language already, does
that make it likely they will just take the C1C2C3 foreign cluster into the
language without change?
Or, if they have onset-clusters C1C2X3, C1X2C3, X1C2C3 (for some
consonants X1 and X2 and X3) in their language already, are they likely to
accept the foreign cluster without change?

Similar questions for various other arrangements apply; for instance if either
C1C2C3 or C3C2C1 occurs as a coda but not as an onset.

(f) Is it true that, in almost every language that has both onsets and codas,
almost every consonant both can be an onset and can be a coda?

(f') What consonants are likeliest to be allowed in onsets but not in codas?
What consonants are likeliest to be allowed in codas but not in onsets?

(g) Is it true that, in almost every language that has onset-clusters, almost
every consonant that can be in an onset, can be an onset all by itself?

(h) Is it true that, in almost every language that has coda-clusters, almost
every consonant that can be in a coda, can be a coda all by itself?

(g',h') What consonants are likeliest to be allowed in clusters but not to be
single-consonant syllable-margins?  Is the answer different depending on
whether they're onsets or codas?

Replies