Re: Allophones or Separate Phonemes?

And Rosta wrote:

>Kristian:
>>
>> Because there aren't any specific IPA symbols representing
>> pharyngeal approximants. So I could have chosen other symbols,
>> but I didn't. Besides, in the modern language they are now
>> realized as voiced and voiceless velar approximants in syllable-
>> final position - at the phonemic level, that is. So the turned m
>> with a long right leg seems appropriate.
>
>I see: that makes sense. Though, BTW, the IPA does provide away for
>diacriticizing symbols for fricatives to make them signify the
>corresponding approximant: for apical/laminal/dorsal fricatives
>the lowering diacritic is used (currently a small T beneath, I
>think; I've no up-to-date chart here).
>
That's true, the diacritic is a small T. But I could also have used
the symbol for a velar approximant with another dicaritic: a
diacritic for retraction, currently a small line beneath. Without
any specific sign for a pharyngeal approximant, options are
nummerous.

-----<large snip>-----
>
>What does the Boreanesian writing system itself do? (The Livagian
>ones represent only the lexical level of phonology.)
Good Idea!! Maybe if I describe the Boreanesian writing system then
maybe you can identify what's going on with the
non-similar-sounding-but-in-complementary-distribution-and-historica
lly-identical sounds of Boreanesia.

The Boreanesian script is a syllabary script. Or perhaps we should
call it a moraebary script in that every letter represents a mora.
In the grammar I have divided them formally into two types, onset
mora letters and offset mora letters.

There are 16 onset mora letters representing a CV sequence. The V
segment is inherently a schwa /@/, but this can be modified into /i/
/a/ or /u/ by using diacritics (just like the Indic scripts of
Asia). The complete grid is as follows:

k@  N@  t@  n@  t[@ n[@ p@  m@  ?@  j@  l@  w@  h@  s@  L@  x@
ka  Na  ta  na  t[a n[a pa  ma  ?a  ja  la  wa  ha  sa  La  xa
ki  Ni  ti  ni  t[i n[i pi  mi  ?i  ji  li  wi  hi  si  Li  xi
ku  Nu  tu  nu  t[u n[u pu  mu  ?u  ju  lu  wi  hu  su  Lu  xu

Thus, the first row represents the inherent onset mora letters, the
other rows represent modified letters.

There allophones in the chart palatalizing the dental oral and nasal
stops (_t[_ and _n[_ and _s_ before _i_.

There are 5 offset mora letters representing the coda of closed
syllables, represented here as X. This X segment is inherently a
stiff phonation ending in a glottal stop (ie., X?). But this can be
modified into slack phonation, or X ending in voicelessness of h
(ie., Xh), by the use of a diacritic. The complete grid is as
follows (I'll represent the oral velar approximant by _@_ and the
nasalized counterpart by _N_):

@?     j?     l?     w?     N?
@h     jh     lh     wh     Nh

Both onset and offset mora letters are combined to form syllables. A
light syllable with only a mora in length is represented by an onset
mora letter, a heavy syllable with two mora in length is represented
by a onset mora letter followed by a offset mora letter. An offset
mora letter by itself cannot form a word. Three types of syllables
can be thus be represented schematically as:

CV  -  light syllable
CVX? - heavy syllable with stiff phonation
CVXh - heavy syllable with slack phonation

More allophones arise when onset mora letters are combined with
offset mora letters. A _-@?_ or _-@h_ following a V segment with a
central vowel _@_ or _a_ is "monophthongized": _C@:?_, _C@:h_,
_Ca:?_, or _Ca:h_ depending on the combination. Similarly, _-j?_ and
_-jh_ "monophthongizes" following a front vowel: _Ci:?_ and _Ci:h_.
Similar for _-w?_ and _-wh_ after a back vowel _u_.

Even though the offsets _-@?_ and _-@h_ are in complementary
distribution with the onsets _?-_ and _h-_ respectively, and evolved
historically from the same phoneme in the protolanguage (voiced and
voiceless pharyngeal approximants), they are not represented by
letters that resemble each other in any way. The same goes for _-j?_
and _j-_, _-jh_ and _s-_, _-l?_ and _l-_, _-lh_ and _L-_, _-w?_ and
_w-_, _-wh_ and _x-_. The script represents onsets and rhymes by
different symbols altogether.

I suppose some kind of native Boreanesian language tendencies has
developed so much in me that the Boreanesian in me tells me to
represent onsets, rhymes, codas, and phonation by different symbols
altogether - even when I know that Romanized scripts like the IPA
doesn't but represents things as segments.

Currently, in the grammar I'm writing, I am in fact representing the
Boreanesian language through a version of the IPA where digraphs
represent a mora - much like digraphs in the two charts I have just
made. That is; a CV sequence represents one onset mora, and a X? or
Xh sequence represents stiff or slack offset moras repsectively. Its
practical in the sense that every mora can easily be identified -
every mora represented by two letters. The result may look cluttered
and long, but once you understand the allophonic rules involved its
quite easy (for me at least). What do you think about that?

-----<snip>-----

>> >> Comments, please!
>> >
>> >My comment is that I very much hope that you *will* study
>>
>> >linguistics at university.
>>
>> We'll see about that. I have 'til after summer to make a final
>> decision. 8-)
>
>Have you checked whether it is possible to do Anthro + Lx together?
>
I've been pretty busy lately, but I have set a date this week to
talk with the people at the university.

-kristian- 8-)