Re: Further Questions on Phonology
| From: | Christopher B Wright <faceloran@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, June 17, 2002, 10:46 |
|---|
>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).
Well, anything is possible. In my mind, the most likely outcome would be
dialects that voice certain fricatives under certain rules, but anyone
could understand anyone else speaking a slightly different dialect.
>Does this make
>sense? or would the language get all the voiced correlates of it's
unvoiced
>consonants once it opened the door to voicing any of them?
Yes and partative-yes. That is, I think that many of the fricatives would
have voiced/unvoiced pairs, but not all (some exceptions being those at
the back of the mouth and perhaps dentals).
Bear in mind that I don't actually know everything (I forgot most of it
in the past two years), but I read another answer after writing mine, and
the other one seems to agree with me.
Laimes,
Wright.
If one person calls you a mule, ignore him.
If a second person calls you a mule, look in the mirror.
If a third person calls you a mule, buy a saddle.
Reply