Re: Critique sought

Nik Taylor wrote:

> "Thomas R. Wier" wrote:
> > But if you don't, it won't be very naturalistic.
>
> But there are natural langs that are exceptions to those.
Well, that's not the point.  What's important is not whether
exceptions exist, it's how many exceptions exist, and where they
exist, and how generally prevalent there are in a systemic sense.

> > If it has 1 nasal, it'll probably have [n] or [m];
>
> Most likely /n/
Why do you think?  I'm pretty sure that there are quite a few systems
out there with just an [m].  I've seen no hard evidence linking one or
the other as more likely.

> > The latter is almost
> > certainly not going to be the case -- language changes most easily
> > by applying rules, and while allophones may be in freevariation,
> > (a) they usually aren't, and (b) a full phoneme almost certainly wouldn't
> > be (otherwise, why would people distinguish it in the first place?).
>
> But consider the /r/ in many dialects, where both something like /kA/
> and /kAr/ (I'm not sure of the vowel) are possible, and in free
> variation (tho admittedly sociologically conditioned) variation.
Well, that's not free variation.  Free variation is, well, free  :)

======================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704   AIM: Deuterotom
Website: <http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."

Non cuicumque datum est habere nasum.
It is not given to just anyone to have a nose.
        -- Martial
======================================