Re: OT: Non-Human Phonology

Rob Haden wrote:

> Pretty soon the question of language came up.  The way I see it, the
> anthroposaurs would have been pretty bird-like, with feathers and probably
> even beaks.  As a result, the sounds they made would have also been
> similar to those of real-life birds.  That means their language would have
> to be radically different from that of humans, at least when it comes to
> phonology.  So I started thinking: what meaningful elements would develop
> in such creatures?
The sound-producing organ in birds (the syrinx) has two separate sources
of sound; some birds are able to control these independently. So in
addition to controlling pitch and duration, you might have a distinction
between single and double sounds. Some birds also have a certain amount
of control over timbre.

On the other hand, most of the versatility of bird sounds is in the
songbirds (oscines), which would have evolved long after birds split
from (the rest of the) dinosaurs. So you probably should look at the
sounds made by non-passerine birds like ostriches, turkeys, geese, and
so on. There's still quite a variety of sounds. I have a page of links
to animal sounds which hasn't been updated in a while, but some of the
sites I linked to might still be around.

http://www.io.com/~hmiller/animals/sound-sites.html

You could also check out the "Crocodile Communication" link. Other than
birds, crocodilians are the closest thing to dinosaurs that have
recordings of their sounds available.

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/natsci/herpetology/brittoncrocs/croccomm.html