Re: Why Not More Nasals!!!!? (was: Is this a realistic phonology?)

Nik Taylor wrote:

> > IMO, there is absolutely nothing unusual about having more voiced
> > nasal stops than voiced oral stops.
>
> Except that they ARE unusual, in that they are uncommon.
Well, I think the implication of this argument has been that, though it
certainly is unusual in any European language for that to occur, it's
by no means uncommon in many Asian languages, and since few of
us have actually studied in depth many languages outside those
contexts (European or Asian), how can we be certain that,
universally speaking, it's not in fact the reverse?  That is to say,
couldn't it be the reverse in fact, if we here in this forum just
knew more about say African or Native American tribal languages?
Does anyone here *know* that those languages have fewer nasals
than voiced stops?

I would surmise that since nasals and oral voiced stops are so closely
related anyways, that your average language will have about equal numbers
of them, give or take a few.   I would think that no language has, like,
seven nasal consonants, while at the same time having no voiced oral stops :)

=======================================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704   AIM: Deuterotom
Website: <http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."

There's nothing particularly wrong with the
proletariat. It's the hamburgers of the
proletariat that I have a problem with. - Alfred Wallace
========================================================