Re: Random |mormon| :-) (was: my proposals for a philosophical

Andreas Johansson scripsit:

> I meant, of course, that Tairezazh can't have non-initial /m/.
Arrgh, and I thought "can't have non-final /m/" was such a k3wl konstraint,
er, constraint.  AFAIK there are no natlangs that put more restrictions on
initial consonants than on final ones.  A challenge!

> Non-initial [m] occurs, but only as an allophone of /n/ occuring before
> labial consonants. Eg _tshenp_ [tSEmp] "forest".
Then perhaps it is better to say that there is only one final nasal,
which is given the same place of articulation as the following consonant,
or [n] if there is none.  This is what happens in Italian, although for
historical reasons both "n" and "m" are used in spelling.  But the
nasal in "inferno", e.g., gets labiodental articulation.  Does this
work across morpheme/word boundaries, as it does in Italian?

--
Yes, chili in the eye is bad, but so is your    John Cowan
ear.  However, I would suggest you wash your    jcowan@reutershealth.com
hands thoroughly before going to the toilet.    http://www.reutershealth.com
        --gadicath                              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan