Re: New Try from a New Guy

--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Michael David Martin <mdmartin@i...> wrote:

 >     So, here is what I have come up with:
 >
 > Consonants:
 > Letter     SAMPA
 > b             b
 > d             d
 > f              f
 > g             g
 > k              k
 > l               l
 > m             m
 > n             n
 > p             p
 > r              r
 > s             s
 > sh           S
 > t              t
 > th            T
 > v             v
 > w             w
 > y              j

Looks workable.

Do /s/ and /T/ have [z] and [D] as allophones, or are they
always [s] and [T]?



 > Letter     SAMPA
 > i          I
 > ih         i
 > u          u
 > uh         3

That feels a tad inconsistent...  in the first pair, you're
using the modifier "h" to make a lax /I/ into a tense /i/,while
in the second pair the "h" makes a tense /u/ into a lax /3/.
You might wanna settle for a single function of "h".

To simplify things, you could use English conventions for the
vowel phonemes, e.g. "i" for /I/ and "ee" for /i/...  unless,
of course, you want the language to look deliberately non-English
when written in the Latin alphabet (have you considered giving
the language a native script yet?).



 > 1. Is it reasonable to have the diphthongs [aI], [OI], and [aU] even
though
 > I do not have  the individual sounds of [a], [O] or [U]?

Yes.  American English has the diphthongs [aI], [aU], [eI], [oU]
but not [a], [e], [o] by themselves.



 > 2. But if I write /3/ how does someone
 > else know that [@], [3], [6] and [V] are all included?

If you're just going for a general unarticulated central sound,
I'd suggest to use /@/ to represent it.  [@\], [3], [3\], [6]
etc are basically just "flavored" versions of the schwa [@].
I don't think any language distinguishes between those
phonemically (although Portuguese has two separate unstressed
central sounds: [1] and [6]).



-- Christian Thalmann

Replies