Re: Further Questions on Phonology

Andy Canivet wrote:
> I was wondering if it was reasonable to have a language that makes the
> distinction between voiced and unvoiced consonants - but does not include
> any voiced fricatives (eg. d, t, b, p, g, k, but only f, s, sh, etc with no
> v, z, or zh).
Sure.  Lots of langs are that way.  Old English, for example, had voiced
fricatives only as allophones of the voiceless ones (hence modern
alternations like wolf/wolves or wife/wives).  Modern Spanish is,
arguably, that way too, altho the voiced stops are more often than not
pronounced as voiced fricatives, so you could say that it's the stops
that lack the distinction, while the fricatives possess it.  Latin,
except in Greek loans, had no voiced fricatives, either.  Greek, at one
stage of its development, had voiced and voiceless fricatives, but only
voiceless stops.

--
"There's no such thing as 'cool'.  Everyone's just a big dork or nerd,
you just have to find people who are dorky the same way you are." -
overheard
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42