Re: Further Questions on Phonology

Andy Canivet nevesht:
>
>Hey all,
>
>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).
>
>There may be a historical work-around - by having some archaic root
>language
>that did not distinguish between voiced and unvoiced, and then the modern
>form that makes the distinction but only in a few cases...  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?  Is there
>another
>way to have voiced & unvoiced plosives and glottals but only unvoiced
>fricatives?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Andy
>
You mean like Old English, Spanish(phoneically), Proto IndoEuropean, and
many other languages? It is quite common to have voice distiction in stops
and not in fricatives, so don't woory about it.


-Wayne Chevrier


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx