Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: phonological markedness [was Re: Happy New Year (to some)]

From:Axiem <axiem@...>
Date:Tuesday, January 6, 2004, 1:28
Some people wrote, and I noted:

> > > > "ra" is subject, "ro" (direct) object, "ru" the verb. > > > > > > This seems to be an unlikely kind of alliteration in a natural > > > language. The only phonological difference between agents and > > > patients appears to be the fact that the vowel of one particle > > > is [+low], and the other is [-low], and are otherwise identical! > > > > Well, Japanese has wa for topic (frequently, tho not always, subject) > > and wo for accusative. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't <wo> phonologically /o/? > Besides which, my point was that such a circumstance is > unlikely, not that it can't happen! The point of phonological > contrast is, afterall, to have contrast.
It is now. Historically, however, it wasn't. Japanese is slowly losing the /w/ sound. They used to have "wu" and "we", but those are now "u" and "e". Although, the historicalness still shows up, the most prominant I can think of is negating the informal. "kau"->"kawanai". "kau" was originally "kawu". I personally find it fairly strange that a language that is already phonetically impovished (sp) is losing yet another consonant. But that's what seems to be happening. -Keith

Reply

Nik Taylor <yonjuuni@...>