Re: Sound change rules for erosion

Nik Taylor wrote:

> Amanda Babcock wrote:
> > I currently have:
> >
> >   C=ptkmlrswh
> >   V=aeiuo
> >   all syllables CV
> >(snip)
> > Accent is on the first syllable, with a dactyllic pattern (secondary
> > accent on 4th and, if there is one, 7th syllable).
IMO this is one of the problems. It seems hard to get initial C-clusters
with a strong accent on an initial CV syllable.  Could you somehow have the
accent shift to the 2nd syl. (of longer words maybe?), due to infixes
perhaps? Something similar happens in Malay-- there are
fossilized -al-, -ar-, -um- infixes such that you have forms like: base
**gílang, **g-um-ilang > g@mílang.

Can you have compounds of two CVCV words? That could produce a different
accent pattern--CVcv-CVcv, which would lead to e.g. **básu+kémo > báskem.
Later changes might include: b > v (or p, very Germanic), stressed a > æ
(ash), unstressed e > i, I; the cluster /sk/ > Sk, or sx or S, all attested
in Gmc. langs. Dutch even takes its /sx/ a step further in final position, >
s, then analogizes from there:  older visch 'fish' > vis, ~visser 'fisher';
spaansch ~spaansche 'Spanish" > spaans, spaanse.

My ex. **básu+kémo could even go another route-- as given above, it
apparently remains a compound in underlying form, so subject to unstressed
V-deletion.  But if the compd. becomes lexicalized (i.e. felt as
monomorphemic), then it could become subject to your dactylic pattern--
**básukémo > **básukemó, then > any of basukmo, baskmo, baS(k)mo ~basmo,
bazmo etc.  You might even end up with doublets, baskem and baSmo, with
slightly different meanings.

>
> Some changes you could consider:
>
> Assimilations
>   Nasal + stop -> voiced stop
>    mt -> nt -> d
>    tm -> d
>   Stop + h -> aspirated stop
>    th -> /t_h/
>   Thereby creating a threefold distinction between voiced, voiceless
>   unaspirated and voiceless aspirated
> Consonant losses
>   intervocalic /h/ -> 0
> Compensatory lengthening
>   VhC -> V:C
> Vowel shifts and monophthongalization
>   i     -> ja
>   e     -> i
>   a     -> O
>   o     -> u
>   u     -> wa
>   ae    -> E
>   ai    -> e
>   ao    -> o
>   au/aw -> o
>   ei    -> i
>   ea    -> j&
>   eo    -> jo
>   eu/ew -> ju
>   oi    -> y
>   oe    -> 2
>   oa    -> wa
>   ou/ow -> u
>   (Just a suggestion, there's lots of possibilities for vowel
>    combinations)
Indeed-- Great Vowel Shift strikes again!!

> More assimilations
>   hw, wh -> /w_0/ -> /f/
>   tl -> /tK/ -> /K/ (voiceless lateral fricative)
> Allophony and loss of conditioning environment
>   ti = [tsi]
>   tiha [tsiha] -> tia [tsia] -> tsa [tsa]
> Voiceless vowel allophones deleted
>   sita [si_0ta] -> [sta]
>   (If you want to avoid syllable types like [kta], you can have a rule
>    that deletion only occurs after fricatives, and then later lose the
>    voiceless alophones, thus kita [ki_ta] -> [kita] Alternately, you
>    can have something happpen to complex initial clusters, say,
>    [kt] -> [xt] or [ks] or simply [kt] -> [t])
I like a rule that would fricativize the first of two stops in a cluster;
also, preconsonantal w > f   :-)).  All in all, Nik has presented a goodly
list.

Don't forget that the order of rules is important-- a rule e.g. turning
Vd.stops > frics. has to be ordered before any V-deletion rules, otherwise
there may be no relevant environment for voiced frics. to develop.  And
there are always exceptions!!

I'll take a look at Amanda's posting to see what else  occurs to me-- in
particular, I did feel that final unstressed vowels ought to be
dropped.........

Reply