Re: oh no, not Tech phonology again

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Vasiliy Chernov
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 8:08 AM
> To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> Subject: Re: oh no, not Tech phonology again
>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:52:12 CST, Daniel A. Wier
> <dawier@...> wrote:
>
> <...>
> >Retroflex   ts`   ts`h  ts`'  ts`   ts`h  ts`'
> >  Palatal   ts`j  ts`hj ts`'j ts`j  ts`hj ts`'j
> >  Labiovel  ts`w  ts`hw ts`'w ts`w  ts`hw ts`'w
> >Palatal     tS    tSh   tS'   dZ    dZh   dZ'
> >  Palatal   tSj   tShj  tS'j  dZj   dZhj  dZ'j
> >  Labiovel  tSw   tShw  tS'w  dZw   dZhw  dZ'w
> <...>
> >Fricatives/Nasals
>
> >Retroflex   z`    s`    s`'   n`    n`h   n`'
> >  Palatal   z`j   s`j   s`'j  n`j   n`hj  n`'j
> >  Labiovel  z`w   s`w   s`'w  n`w   n`hw  n`'w
> >Palatal     Z     S     S'    n~    n~h   n~Z'
> >  Palatal   Zj    Sj    S'j   n~j   n~j   n~'j
> >  Labiovel  Zw    Sw    S'w   n~w   n~hw  n~'w
> <...>
> >Laterals/Vibrants/Semivowels
> >
> <...>
> >Retroflex   l`    r`
> >  Palatal   l`j   r`j
> >  Labiovel  l`w   r`w
>
> - Palatalized retrofex (opposed to dentals, alveolars, and palatals
> proper!) arouse some doubt... Seems anthropophonically difficult to me,
> unless they are realized simply as clusters C + [j]. Any natlang
> precedents?
What I was wondering was: is it possible to have palatalized palatals, or
labiovelarized labials, separate from the sets of plain palatals and plain
labials? I suppose a labiovelarized labial would be just a velarized labial,
but how can you palatalize something that's already palatal?


Eric Christopherson / *Aiworegs Ghristobhorosyo suHnus
raccoon@elknet.net