Re: Biwa (was: YAC: ...)
From: | Carlos Eugenio Thompson Pinzón <chlewey@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, October 31, 2000, 21:32 |
Jessi Stefen Bangs wabbe:
> > but those vowels had different evolution:
> > i -> 1 i: -> i: -> i
> > y -> y y: -> 2:H -> 9Y
> > e -> E e: -> e: -> e
> > 2 -> 9 2: -> @\: -> @
> > a -> V a: -> A: -> A
> > o -> O o: -> o:w -> ow
> > u -> U u: -> }: -> }
>
>Is there any pattern to this at all? Generally, vowels tend
>to move en masse, either all raising, all lowering, all long
>vowels diphthongize, etc., or only one at a time. Taking
>examples from English, the Great Vowel Shift raised and
>dipthongized all long stressed vowels, but afterwards an
>isolated phonetic change (in my dialect) changed [au] to [&u].
>
>So, did the vowels here ever have a distinct shift? Or are
>all the changes random?
Well, probably a combination of mass changing and isolated changes.
Previous pattern could suggest that all short vowels became a little
laxer, while long vowels would remind tense. Then some long vowels
would have diphthongised.
The pattern could have been:
i -> I -> 1 i: -> i: -> i
2 -> Y -> y 2: -> 2: -> 2:H -> 9Y
e -> E e: -> e: -> e
3 -> 9 3: -> 3: -> @
a -> @ -> V a: -> a: -> A: -> A
o -> O o: -> o: -> o:w -> ow
} -> U }: -> }: -> }
Well. I know the product: Modern Biwa. I'm just trying to figure
out Old Biwa, and these are just theories.
Another theory could suggest:
i -> I / ij I -> 1, ij -> i
y -> Y / 2H 2H -> 9Y
e -> E / ej ej -> e
2 -> 9 / ew ew -> @
a -> a / A@, a -> V, A@ -> A
o -> O / ow
u -> U / }w }w -> }
where the first change where a split between close and open syllables, then
most diphthongs were lost and would never have been a long stage.
-- Carlos Th
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.