Re: Betreft: Re: Yes, another sketch for a new conlang! [very very long!]
|From:||Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>|
|Date:||Monday, January 17, 2000, 15:23|
At 11:02 17/01/00 +0100, you wrote:
>I think it is difficult to describe vowels with PoA.
I know that well, that's why I asked :) . In a small presentation of
Gua!spi I have, the vowels are put in PoA's, but I'm not sure they describe
well the real PoA's of those vowels.
>I'd say: o is velar, e is dental/alveolar, I wouldn't know what the ashould be.
With the nasal liquid, it would make thus /No/, /ne/ and you don't know
what for a (maybe palatal? no, it would be /i/). The problem is that o is
also rounded, thus labial (so /mo/ could also be...) unless I choose /o/ to
be unrounded... Is the unrounded version of /o/ (what's the IPA for it?
small gamma IIRC...) very rare among natlangs and conlangs?
What do you think of taking /e/ rather advanced (thus /me/), /a/ more
central (/na/) and /o/ more retracted (/No/)? Is this correct? would it be
natural for a nasal whose PoA depends on the following vowel to be
pronounced this way?
|Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G.
"Reality is just another point of view."
homepage : http://rainbow.conlang.org