Re: Futurese

>> >One could also consider counting "dz" and "dj" as separate from "z" and
>> >"j", though they're pronounced identically nowadays AFAIK.
>>
>> "dz" certainly is different from "z". "dj" and "j" are
>> allophones.
>
>I haven't heard either of those statements before -- while (Kunreisiki)
>"du" and "zu" are morphophonemically(?) different, AFAIK they are
>pronounced exactly the same nowadays. So "tuduku" (to continue) is
>pronounced as if written "tuzuku".
>
>And while "di" and "zi" could be considered homophones (since they are
>pronounced the same nowadays -- "tidimu" [to shrink] being pronounced
>like "tizimu"), I'm not sure which sound you would consider them
>allophones of.
Yes, you're right, "dzu" and "zu" are also allophones
nowadays. Sorry for the error, there's been a lot since
I last had a look at Japanese sound system.

Though, when spelled out in kana, they still maintain the
distinction between both di/zi and du/zu, on etymological
grounds.

Cheers,
Javier