Re: ' Khaerakh '

Nicolas Walker wrote:

> To anybody that may be able to advise,
>
> here is my attempt at relating L1 and L2 via the "Proto" word 'khaerakh'.
> PLEASE be critical - I would like to know firstly whether the proposed
> changes in pronunciation and orthography are 'O.K.' (i.e. likely or
> linguistically sound) and secondly, if the relationship proposed is
> resonable.
Yes to both questions**, IMO, though with a slight reservation about the
diphthongization {: > aI in E.F.  (Minor suggestion: most of us don't like
or use X-SAMPA [{] for æ (ae lig.)-- [&] is preferred. Specific Conlang
revisions of XS are called CXS, available on various websites,
http://www.theiling.de/ipa/ for one).
-----------------------
**Actually, orthography-wise, it's probably better to use the
phonetic/phonemic form for all stages; proto-languages almost by definition
weren't written languages but are abstractions based on what can be deduced
from evidence in the survivors.
------------------------
> NB: 'khaerakh' has (as yet) no meaning. It is a random word in which to
> enact the 'rules' numbered below.
This is actually an unnecessary step, at least with present data. Both
languages apparently derive their forms from A.Q=E.I.Q */G{:raX/. However,
it may well be you plan other languages that develop directly and
differently from ProtoA. Or, it may simply be an accident that this
particular word is the same in AQ/EIQ; perhaps others aren't?

It might be worthwhile to know what the original stress pattern was; that
can influence developments. Also, whether PA */Ga.eraG/ is a single
morpheme, or combination of some sort-- compound? derivation?
>
> LANG 1: Qalak
>
> Proto-Archipelagic     khaerakh   /Ga.eraG/
>
> Ancient Qalak           kha(e)rakh   /G{:raX/
>
> Old Qalak   kharakh          /Xa:rX/
>
> Middle Qalak   khârak   /xa:rax/
>
> Modern Qalak   hârak   /harx/
>
Do unstressed(?) vowels always delete?

> LANG 2: Feamordh
>
> Proto-Archipelagic     khaerakh   /Ga.eraG/
>
> Early Insular Qalak  khaerakh   /G{:raX/
>
> Late Insular Qalak  khaerakh  /g{:ra(x)/
EIQ X > LIQ h/__#, which then > 0 in EF; maybe little more natural.
>
> Early Feamordh          khaera   /gaIra/
>
> Middle Feamordh          khaera   /gaIr@/
>
> Post-Occupational F.  gaer   /gaIr/
>
> Modern Feamordh          cêar   /ke:r/
>
This is a nice progression. Do the original forms always develop >
monosyllables in both languages?