Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

This is where the work of building the language gets done.

Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby Miatato » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:05 pm

The proposed phonology seems to stand at:
/a e i o u/ <a e i o u>
/f v ʃ ʒ s z l m n ŋ p t k b d g/ <f v x j s z l m n ng p t k b d g>
With the most recent proposals being "<ng> for /N/, <ngg> for /Ng/, and <n'g> for /ng/" and "<ts> for /ts/, <dz> for /dz/, <tx> for /tS/, and <dj> for /dZ/."

Apparently we don't like initial /ŋ/. There was still some interest being expressed in some sort of rhotic as well.

Where to from here?
Miatato
Site Admin
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby Uh-Oh » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:48 pm

I suggest we take this as our Phonology version 1. We use it going forward until and unless something else comes into play. Maybe it will be too hard for folks not to use a rhotic, and they'll start sneaking them into the lexicon, at which time we'll have the opportunity to go to version 2.
Uh-Oh
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:43 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby kadani » Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:50 pm

Or version 1.0 patchlevel 1 :ugeek: :D
Kaju'il vaixunus'tan viskoreja! Ines'il viskoreja!
Fight linguistic extinction! Invent a language!
Rejistanian word of the day
kadani
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:45 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby Uh-Oh » Sun Mar 21, 2010 10:49 am

Regarding the length of vowels (from another thread):

I'm disinclined to have phonemic vowel length. It seems too subtle a distinction, to hear the difference between "kuloo" and "kulo", or "na" and "naa". Other thoughts?
Uh-Oh
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:43 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby kadani » Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:22 am

I am surprised by that given pairs like "pit" and "Pete" or "bit" and "beet". It seems to me a common English feature and neither the Ukistanis and Usistanis nor those in my various English classes had a problem with this, which is why I think it is a neat distinction and allows us to have words which are not as long. *shrugs*
Kaju'il vaixunus'tan viskoreja! Ines'il viskoreja!
Fight linguistic extinction! Invent a language!
Rejistanian word of the day
kadani
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:45 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby Uh-Oh » Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:45 pm

kadani wrote:I am surprised by that given pairs like "pit" and "Pete" or "bit" and "beet". It seems to me a common English feature and neither the Ukistanis and Usistanis nor those in my various English classes had a problem with this, which is why I think it is a neat distinction and allows us to have words which are not as long. *shrugs*


Oh, I think I misinterpreted what you meant by "long". I thought you meant simply duration, not a change in vowel quality. You were referring to what we learn in English phonics in grammar school as "short" and "long" vowels, which have nothing to do with duration (to English ears).

For example, the "i" in "bit" differs from the "ee" in "beet" not in length, but in fundamental vowel quality. And I think we've settled on five vowels: /a e i o u/, which includes the sound of "ee" in "beet" but not the sound of "i" in "bit". It is a common English feature but not so common in other languages and, in fact, the distinctiveness varies depending on the English dialect.

(Now I'm curious: do the "i" and the "ee" sounds that we've been talking about seem to you, kadani, to differ in length but not in vowel quality?)
Uh-Oh
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:43 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby kadani » Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:12 pm

I am very bad at determining the quality of vowels. I see things as variants when they aren't and as different when they are represented alike in X-SAMPA (the /i:/ in league and that in Liga are IMHO different).
Kaju'il vaixunus'tan viskoreja! Ines'il viskoreja!
Fight linguistic extinction! Invent a language!
Rejistanian word of the day
kadani
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:45 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby PeteBleackley » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:19 am

What about non-phomemic vowel length? My trimoraic morphology suggestion will produce long vowels as the surface realisation of a VV sequence, but it's possible to infix a consonant between the two vowels. For example, we might have maasu [ma:su], one of whose cases has the form mahasu [mahasu]
PeteBleackley
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:09 am

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby alavda-isere » Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:38 pm

Bypassing the length distinction discussion for a moment, could I get some clarification on which consonants we want to be allowed as codas? I remember some discussion on the old forum about this, but can't remember seeing a list. For my part, I'm fine with anything being a coda, except maybe affricates (no real reason, just personal preference).
alavda-isere
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 11:26 am
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Phonological and Orthographical Issues Continued

Postby Miatato » Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:10 pm

I am not sure where we are on the allowed/disallowed codas.
Miatato
Site Admin
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:00 pm

Next

Return to The Language Factory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron