Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: "Essiness, Ishiness, Veeiness, Aitchiness & /X/" (was: none)

From:Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>
Date:Monday, March 11, 2002, 1:56
At 1:05 pm +0100 8/3/02, Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>En réponse à "M.E.S." <suomenkieli@...>:
>> [h] than anything else (*o*), although I'm >> contemplating to incorporate more of the /X/ [as in >> Dutch g or Spanish j]. BTW, /X/ is called a fricative >> - right? (Get that confused with affricative) >> > >Well, it's indeed a fricative, but not the one you're thinking of :)) . The >Spanish "j" is /x/, the voiceless velar fricative. The Dutch "g" is /x/ >only in >the North. In the South it's /G/, the voiced velar fricative. /X/ is the >voiceless *uvular* fricative, farther back in the throat (it's the voiceless >equivalent of the French "r"). Well, not a bad sound by itself, but probably >not the one you were thinking of :)) .
Exactly. Out of interest, the Welsh {ch} is strictly [X], tho Anglophones tend to pronounce it as [x]. This is probably why the Welsh {ch} never gets fronted like the German ich-laut when next to front vowels. Of course [X] is only the voiceless equivalent of the modern Parisian [R]; the older trilled uvular "r", which I have heard, has a different voiceless equivalent - the {rh} as pronounced in some parts of North Wales. The Welsh /r/ is always trilled. Normally it's an apical trill (tip of the tongue) but in some parts of the north one hears a uvular trill. {rh} is the voiceless equivalent of these trills. Ray. ========================================= A mind which thinks at its own expense will always interfere with language. [J.G. Hamann 1760] =========================================