Re: New Conlang: Emegali Phonology

From: "Vasiliy Chernov" <bc_@...>
[to me]

| I tried to understand your notation for Proto-Semitic consonants, and
| I couldn't. It seems that you used a reconstruction which is different
| from what I can find in my sources (the latter seem to have more
| affricates - for example, as the source for Arabic interdentals).

I should've done this originally: the chart of Proto-Semitic consonant relations
is here: http://www.bartleby.com/61/JPG/proto.jpg

| I believe that in order to avoid ambiguities it would be more practical to
| refer primarily to Arabic (Fuskh) phonemes, supplying them with number
| indexes in those few cases where the Arabic sound results from merging two
| PS phonemes, and adding the correspondencies from other langs to specify
| what is meant. For example:

That's the best bet, using Arabic. The emphatic interdental fricative, commonly
reconstructed as PS *t_. (t with an underline *and* a dot underneath), is
cognate with Arabic Zaa/Dhaa (the emphatic Taa with a dot above). And Arabic
emphatic Daad is reconstructed as Semitic *s'. (s-acute with a dot below). Three
characters to write one phoneme, how ugly....

~Danny~


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com