Re: Elvish ideas ...

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Andreas Johansson wrote:

> Quoting Christian Thalmann <cinga@...>:
>
> > Really cool!  I'm very fond of the orthography, as well as the
> > original yet pleasant-sounding phonology.  |Chreanco chainano|
> > is especially cool.  =D
I agree entirely! (I've been to lazy to comment on this before, but
consider this an official blessing :P )

> > There are two things that remind me of my Oro Mpaa: The pala-
> > tization of /d t/ to [dZ tS] (though I would have expected
> > /s/ -> [S] too),
>
> That's an idea ... it may still be incorporated. It'd cause some phonetic
> mergers - _si_ and _chi_ would sound the same, forinstance. I'll have to give
> that some thought.
>
> That would have to involve turning /sj/ (as in a hypothetical word _seom_
> [sjom]) into [S], too. Seems like a very natural change.
Well, for my dialect of English (and it's predecessors):
1 tj > tS
2 dj > dZ

3a sj > s  > s 'suit'
3b sj > sj > S 'assume'
4a zj > z  > z
4b zj > zj > Z 'presume'

I'm not sure what the conditions were that decided whether sj became s or
S (etc), other than that one happened a while ago (possibly before it was
Australian) and the other has happened more recently. I think it might
just be if it's the first syllable in a word, it became /s/, otherwise it
didn't, but I dunno. As simple as that and it isn't consistent with /lj/ >
/l/ or /lj/ (which in broader dialects processeds to /j/, hence Austraia).

But yeah, my point is have the best of all worlds and have complexities
with stress. :)

--
Tristan                  <kesuari@...>

Yesterday I was a dog. Today I'm a dog. Tomorrow I'll probably still
be a dog. Sigh! There's so little hope for advancement.
                -- Snoopy

Reply