Re: Tonal inflection?

On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Dana Nutter <deinx.nxtxr@...> wrote:
> This is still just an experiment.  I think maybe I'll try the
> comparative tone.  Maybe 55 for the superlative and 35 or 31 (more,
> less) for comparatives.
If you have distinct superlative and comparative (I do without
a morphological distinction in gzb, letting context disambiguate),
wouldn't you need four tone contours, for most/more/less/least? -- and
maybe a fifth tone contour for equality comparison (as X as Y)?

> Now for consonants.  I could have maybe four articulations points:
> labial, alveolar, velar, and uvular.  Each will have a stops,
Why not palatal?  I find palatal consonants a good deal easier
to pronounce than uvular, and they sound to my ear more
distinct from alveolar consonants than velar do from uvular.
Retroflexes are a bit harder, but still easier than uvular, though
I'm not sure they sound distinct enough from palatals and
alveolars to pack them all in to the same engelang.

> fricatives, implosives, clicks.   Then figure in voicing, aspiration
But not nasals or approximants?  Interesting.

> and palatization just for a start.   Given enough options, I could
OK, so palatal consonants would occur as palatalizations of
the velars or alveolars...?   Consider labialization as well.

--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/

Reply