Re: Future English

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 21:32:33 +0100, =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg?= Rhiemeier
<joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:

>That's a good start!  I'd like to see more of it.  What are the
>sound changes like?
Thanks. :)

The sound changes are pretty simple, basically a simplification of the
current English phoneme inventory.  Aspiration, rather than voicing,
becomes the primary distinction between stops.  The vowels are simplified,
phonemically, into a classic 5-vowel scheme.  Basically the long/short
vowel distinctions are lost, stressed schwa and /6/ become /o/ (e.g.
gun /gVn/ > gon /kon/, father /'fA.D6/ > fado /'fa.to/), unstressed schwa
becomes /a/, and /&/ merges with /e/.  Phonetically, unstressed non-low
vowels have lax allophones and the low vowel /a/ schwa in closed
syllables.  Most consonant clusters are erased and/or simplified -- all
initial and final ones are erased.  The dental fricatives /T/ and /D/ merge
with /t_h/ and /t/ (written |t| and |d|), respectively.  Also, the labial
approximant /w/ merges with /v/.  Due to foreign influence, the former
voiceless glottal fricative /h/ is now pronounced as a voiceless velar
fricative -- /x/ (but still written |h|).  Stress falls on the first
syllable of every word and is weaker than that of current English.

Some examples of the sound changes:
three [Tri:] > *d@ri [d@.'ri] > dari ['ta.ri]
stir [st6] > *s@to [s@.'to] > sado ['sa.to]
kat [k_h&t_h] > keta ['k_he.t_h@]
test [t_hEst] > tesda ['t_hes.t@]
walk [wAk_h] > vaka ['va.k_h@]
smoke [sm_0oUk_h] > *s@mok [s@.'mok_h] > samoka ['sa.mo.k_h@]
speech [spi:tS)] > *s@pic [s@.'pitS)] > sabic(a) ['sa.pIts)] ~ ['sa.pi.tS)@]
break [br\eIk_h] > *b@rek [b@.'4ek_h] > bareka ['pa.4e.k_h@]
pray [p_hr\ej] > *p@re [p_h@.'4e] > pare ['p_ha.4e]
stay [stej] > *s@te [s@.'te] > sade ['sa.te]
future ['fju.tS)6] > *fjuco ['fju.tS)o] > fuco ['fu.tS)o] or fiuco
['fi.u.ts)o]
take him ['t_heIk_h hIm] > tekim ['t_he.k_hIm]
high [haj] > hai [xaI]

>And it is not implausible, though I would give it at least 1000 years
>to evolve.  500 years are a bit short, I think.  The transformation
>of a mostly analytic, inflecting language into a highly synthetic
>agglutinating language is interesting.
I think you're right.  It should be at least 1000 years in the future.

- Rob

Reply