Re: Proposed Sound change

Danny Wier wrote:
> Though I will say, and this is my opinion -- if vowel A and vowel B tend
> to migrate in one direction, vowel C probably will go the same way. So I
> would imagine that more likely /u:/ would tend toward /i:/
Why?  As it is, /u:/ and /u/ would merge into /u/ (which then split into
/u/ and /o/ based on whether the syllable was open or closed).  Thus:

/i/ -> /i/, /e/
/i:/ -> /ji/ -> /ju/ -> /u/
/u/ -> /u/, /o/
/u:/ -> /u/, /o/

Other vowel changes:

/ai/ -> /E/
/au/ -> /O/
/a:/ -> /a/
/a/ -> /E/, /O/ depending on previous consonant; in Classical Uatakassí,
/a/ had a front allophone after dental, alveopalatal, and palatal
consonants, and a back allophone elsewhere, thus [pA], [kA], but [ta],
[tSa], short /a/ tended to be pronounced a bit higher.  Or perhaps it
should be the other way around?  Short /a/ would remain /a/, and long
/a/ would merge with /E/ and /O/?  I'm thinking of Old English a: -> o:

> Or you could have a conlang with no rounded vowels, or do your conpeople
> have lips...
Yeah, they have lips.

--
Dievas dave dantis; Dievas duos duonos
God gave teeth; God will give bread - Lithuanian proverb
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor