A new phonemic distinction in Gzarondan
|From:||Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon) <dragon@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, October 14, 2004, 7:36|
I would like to introduce a new consonant into Gzarondan phonology,
namely a phonemic distinction between /x/ and /x_w/ (unlabialised
versus labialised velar fricatives).
I'm trying to decide what other changes to make to the phonology in
order to make the new phoneme set look reasonably naturalistic. I
would appreciate some advice.
Intuitively, I feel that if there is a /x/ vs /x_w/ distinction then
there ought to be a similar distinction for (at the very least) all
fricatives and approximates at or behind the velar position. This
would mean adding a /h/ vs /h_w/ distinction.
Alternatively, I could do away with /h/ (but how many natural
languages don't have /h/ ?) and use the /x/ vs /x_w/ distinction in
place of the /x/ vs /h/ distinction. This conserves the total number
Building on the above approach, I could rewrite history to say that
all unvoiced fricatives once distinguished labialised and
non-labialised forms, but that /T_w/ later became /f/ and /s_w/ later
became /S/, whereas /x_w/ remained as it was.
This sounds reasonable to me, but perhaps there's a better option.
The current consonant phoneme inventory is listed below.
Stops, Nasals & Trills:
/p/ /b/ /m/
/t/ /d/ /n/ /r/
Fricatives, Laterals & Approximants:
/s/ /z/ /K/ /l/