Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Palatal vs. Palatalized (was Re: Orthography of palatalized consonants)

From:kcasada <kcasada@...>
Date:Saturday, January 15, 2005, 22:31
Hmm! I wondered about exactly this, because I wanted to incorporate
palatalization of initial consonants in my (nameless little proto-) conlang as
an indicator of verbal mood, but wondered what would happen to the consonants
that were already palatal . . .
Krista

>Basically, how I learned the difference between a >palatal and a palatalized consonant is this: a >palatalized consonant is sort of a double >articulation. [t_j], for example has the tip of the >tongue at the alveolus, while the dorsum of the tongue >is moving upwards towards the hard palate, while [c] >involves just the dorsum of the tongue moving up to >the hard palate. > >The difference between a palatalized consonant and a >simple consonant + [j] cluster is even more subtle. > >Russian allows a distinction between syllables like >[a.t_ja] and [at.ja], to make up two examples. I'm not >sure if it could allow a distinction between [tja] and >[t_ja], though it's possible, since the hard sign, >used to cancel palatalization on a consonant, evolved >from proto-Slavic over-short [u], IIRC. > >It appears that you can generate palatal consonants >from palatalized velar consonants. It is postulated >that Sanskrit [c] and [J\] came from proto-IE *[kj] >and *[gj]. And from there, the modern Hindi [tS] and >[dZ] are the result of affrication of [c] and [J\]; >palatal plosives are _extremely_ prone to affrication >and often do shift forwards to postalveolar >affricates. > >Clear anything up for you? > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ >Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 250MB Speicher kostenlos - Hier
anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de

Reply

Roger Mills <rfmilly@...>