Re: Transcription exercise

Paul Roser wrote:

> The number of languages that distinguish two voiceless lateral fricatives is
> quite small - off the top of my head, Bura, Cocopa, Northern Diegueno
> distinguish dental/alveolar and palatalized/palatal versions, Toda and
> A-hmao distinguish dental/alveolar and retroflex versions, and one of the
> Central Highland languages of Papua (Wahgi or Nii IIRC) has voiceless
> lateral fricative allophones of its *three* laterals - dental, alveolar,
> velar, but I think they only contrast word-finally.
>
> Herman Miller's Virelli is one of the few conlangs I've seen with a
> distinction between /hl, l/ and /hL, L/ (where L is the palatal lateral - HM
> uses a cedilla or something under the palatal phones).
It shóuld technically be a comma below, but I use the precomposed ļ
character for convenience. Using l̦ (with a comma-below diacritic) might
not show up in some browsers and email programs.

> I think that the distinction is more audible when there is a very clear
> front/palatal vs back/velar distinction between the two.
Or if there are additional clues to the point of articulation, such as
palatal off-glides. Lindiga distinguishes between alveolar and retroflex
lateral fricatives. I think this might be an easier distinction to hear
than alveolar vs. palatal, but it's also helped by the allophonic
variation of the vowels in the vicinity of retroflex consonants.