Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: clicks

Expand Messages
  • DDeden
    I noted that by clicking on the links you can hear varieties of the clicks. It says that the Khoi have 4 clicks and 4 tones. I haven t found anything that
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 31, 2007
      I noted that by clicking on the links you can hear varieties of the
      clicks. It says that the Khoi have 4 clicks and 4 tones.

      I haven't found anything that indicates aquatic connections directly,
      but the clicks do sound similar to some dolphin sounds. I think that
      clicking is much more O2 conservative than speech, but more data
      required. Dolphins can click bursts of 600 clicks per second (?),
      sperm whales can click as individual clicks.
      DD


      --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen <marc.verhaegen@...> wrote:
      >
      > > I wonder how clicks correlate to: frequency (beats per minute), pitch,
      > > Eustachian tube and affiliated muscles, swallowing, efficiency of
      > > communication during breathhold, echolocation.
      > >
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant#Click_genesis_and_click_loss
      >
      > Thanks for the link, DD.
      > Syllables in human languages typically last 0.2" to 0.25", but 4/"
      is far
      > too fast for underwaterclicks I guess? Perhaps 1/" or 1.2/" = heart
      beat??
      > Much slower?
      > I have no idea about pitch. Can this be tested underwater? Can click
      > languages give some clues?
      >
      > --Marc
      >
    • DDeden
      http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/Phonetics%20II%20page%20four.htm Note the association of clicks, tone changes in Khoisan lullabyes. East Asians retain the
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 1, 2007
        http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/Phonetics%20II%20page%20four.htm

        Note the association of clicks, tone changes in Khoisan lullabyes.

        East Asians retain the 4 tones but lost the 4 click types. Why the
        loss of the clicks? Less useful in humid-freshwater-terrestrial? Still
        useful in arid (less exhaled moisture in respiration?) like sandy
        beaches? Why change from click to consonant, less aquatic so more air
        available to waste? More mixing of nasal sound with oral sound?

        Seems to me that separate nasal sound (hum) and oral sound (click)
        converged post-AAT into modern mixture of language sounds.

        Above surface back-floating: nasal tones, with oral 'sound effects"

        Below surface forage-diving: oral clicks, non-nasal grunt/bark/quacks.

        Of the hundreds of possible human sounds, which carry furthest under
        surface? Which require least air lost? Which echo the best? Which
        "fit" with flooded nostrils and ears?

        Is it possible to hum and click simultaneously? Yes.
        Is it possible to hum without losing air? No.
        Is it possible to vocalize without losing air? Yes, by keeping lips
        and soft palate close and filling the cheeks, then reinhaling from the
        filled cheeks into the lungs, but this air is "used".

        If you have sound card and speakers, you can hear the lullaby.
        DD



        --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen <marc.verhaegen@...> wrote:
        >
        > > I wonder how clicks correlate to: frequency (beats per minute), pitch,
        > > Eustachian tube and affiliated muscles, swallowing, efficiency of
        > > communication during breathhold, echolocation.
        > >
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant#Click_genesis_and_click_loss
        >
        > Thanks for the link, DD.
        > Syllables in human languages typically last 0.2" to 0.25", but 4/"
        is far
        > too fast for underwaterclicks I guess? Perhaps 1/" or 1.2/" = heart
        beat??
        > Much slower?
        > I have no idea about pitch. Can this be tested underwater? Can click
        > languages give some clues?
        >
        > --Marc
        >
      • DDeden
        I have mentioned that to correlate the aqua-photic respiratory cycle (ARC) with the dive-song (BF/DF male-female feed-rest/nurse cycle), it was necessary for
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 1, 2007
          I have mentioned that to correlate the aqua-photic respiratory cycle
          (ARC) with the dive-song (BF/DF male-female feed-rest/nurse cycle), it
          was necessary for the nasal and aural cavities to have been
          warm-seawater filled. Air retained in the cheeks and under the
          philtrum, allowed clicking AND philtrum pressure on the base of the
          nose. This pressure (same as a finger held under the nose to postpone
          a sneeze) (likely combined with the short nasal cycle of the inferior
          conchae) kept the oral and nasal cavities separate and at different
          ambient pressures.

          Once at the surface, both the nasal and oral cavities were air-filled,
          however the aural cavities remained water-filled until the diving was
          all done for the day.

          This could not have occurred sustainably in freshwater, nor in
          cold-surface seawater, nor in alkaline or acidic water much different
          from the pH of the mucus. They could have dove from a warm surface to
          very cold depths (the nasal and aural cavities kept warm), but they
          could not have dived from cold surface waters. Therefore ear extosis
          would not be expected to be widespread as is found among coastal HS in
          Peru or Brazil, who dove with dry sinuses and dry middle ears.
          DD


          http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/Phonetics%20II%20page%20four.htm
          >
          > Note the association of clicks, tone changes in Khoisan lullabyes.
          >
          > East Asians retain the 4 tones but lost the 4 click types. Why the
          > loss of the clicks? Less useful in humid-freshwater-terrestrial? Still
          > useful in arid (less exhaled moisture in respiration?) like sandy
          > beaches? Why change from click to consonant, less aquatic so more air
          > available to waste? More mixing of nasal sound with oral sound?
          >
          > Seems to me that separate nasal sound (hum) and oral sound (click)
          > converged post-AAT into modern mixture of language sounds.
          >
          > Above surface back-floating: nasal tones, with oral 'sound effects"
          >
          > Below surface forage-diving: oral clicks, non-nasal grunt/bark/quacks.
          >
          > Of the hundreds of possible human sounds, which carry furthest under
          > surface? Which require least air lost? Which echo the best? Which
          > "fit" with flooded nostrils and ears?
          >
          > Is it possible to hum and click simultaneously? Yes.
          > Is it possible to hum without losing air? No.
          > Is it possible to vocalize without losing air? Yes, by keeping lips
          > and soft palate close and filling the cheeks, then reinhaling from the
          > filled cheeks into the lungs, but this air is "used".
          >
          > If you have sound card and speakers, you can hear the lullaby.
          > DD
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen <marc.verhaegen@> wrote:
          > >
          > > > I wonder how clicks correlate to: frequency (beats per minute),
          pitch,
          > > > Eustachian tube and affiliated muscles, swallowing, efficiency of
          > > > communication during breathhold, echolocation.
          > > >
          >
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant#Click_genesis_and_click_loss
          > >
          > > Thanks for the link, DD.
          > > Syllables in human languages typically last 0.2" to 0.25", but 4/"
          > is far
          > > too fast for underwaterclicks I guess? Perhaps 1/" or 1.2/" = heart
          > beat??
          > > Much slower?
          > > I have no idea about pitch. Can this be tested underwater? Can click
          > > languages give some clues?
          > >
          > > --Marc
          > >
          >
        • DDeden
          Just to add a few novel linguistic threads, Mongolian throat singing: ? Manus Island bilabial trill: (PNG Admirilty Group) NaDene (Navajo, Nor Cal) are
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 1, 2007
            Just to add a few novel linguistic threads,
            Mongolian throat singing: ?
            Manus Island bilabial trill: (PNG Admirilty Group)
            NaDene (Navajo, Nor Cal) are generally tonal
            Thai, Viet, 1/2 Tibet tonal
            Mongolian, Malay, Cambodian non-tonal
            Lithuanian was tonal
            Ancient Greek was tonal
            Ancient Semitic: consonants written only
            Nilo-Saharan was tonal

            --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com, "DDeden" <alas_my_loves@...> wrote:
            >
            > I have mentioned that to correlate the aqua-photic respiratory cycle
            > (ARC) with the dive-song (BF/DF male-female feed-rest/nurse cycle), it
            > was necessary for the nasal and aural cavities to have been
            > warm-seawater filled. Air retained in the cheeks and under the
            > philtrum, allowed clicking AND philtrum pressure on the base of the
            > nose. This pressure (same as a finger held under the nose to postpone
            > a sneeze) (likely combined with the short nasal cycle of the inferior
            > conchae) kept the oral and nasal cavities separate and at different
            > ambient pressures.
            >
            > Once at the surface, both the nasal and oral cavities were air-filled,
            > however the aural cavities remained water-filled until the diving was
            > all done for the day.
            >
            > This could not have occurred sustainably in freshwater, nor in
            > cold-surface seawater, nor in alkaline or acidic water much different
            > from the pH of the mucus. They could have dove from a warm surface to
            > very cold depths (the nasal and aural cavities kept warm), but they
            > could not have dived from cold surface waters. Therefore ear extosis
            > would not be expected to be widespread as is found among coastal HS in
            > Peru or Brazil, who dove with dry sinuses and dry middle ears.
            > DD
            >
            >
            > http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/Phonetics%20II%20page%20four.htm
            > >
            > > Note the association of clicks, tone changes in Khoisan lullabyes.
            > >
            > > East Asians retain the 4 tones but lost the 4 click types. Why the
            > > loss of the clicks? Less useful in humid-freshwater-terrestrial? Still
            > > useful in arid (less exhaled moisture in respiration?) like sandy
            > > beaches? Why change from click to consonant, less aquatic so more air
            > > available to waste? More mixing of nasal sound with oral sound?
            > >
            > > Seems to me that separate nasal sound (hum) and oral sound (click)
            > > converged post-AAT into modern mixture of language sounds.
            > >
            > > Above surface back-floating: nasal tones, with oral 'sound effects"
            > >
            > > Below surface forage-diving: oral clicks, non-nasal grunt/bark/quacks.
            > >
            > > Of the hundreds of possible human sounds, which carry furthest under
            > > surface? Which require least air lost? Which echo the best? Which
            > > "fit" with flooded nostrils and ears?
            > >
            > > Is it possible to hum and click simultaneously? Yes.
            > > Is it possible to hum without losing air? No.
            > > Is it possible to vocalize without losing air? Yes, by keeping lips
            > > and soft palate close and filling the cheeks, then reinhaling from the
            > > filled cheeks into the lungs, but this air is "used".
            > >
            > > If you have sound card and speakers, you can hear the lullaby.
            > > DD
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In AAT@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen <marc.verhaegen@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > > I wonder how clicks correlate to: frequency (beats per minute),
            > pitch,
            > > > > Eustachian tube and affiliated muscles, swallowing, efficiency of
            > > > > communication during breathhold, echolocation.
            > > > >
            > >
            >
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant#Click_genesis_and_click_loss
            > > >
            > > > Thanks for the link, DD.
            > > > Syllables in human languages typically last 0.2" to 0.25", but 4/"
            > > is far
            > > > too fast for underwaterclicks I guess? Perhaps 1/" or 1.2/" = heart
            > > beat??
            > > > Much slower?
            > > > I have no idea about pitch. Can this be tested underwater? Can click
            > > > languages give some clues?
            > > >
            > > > --Marc
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • Marc Verhaegen
            ... Easier pronunciation perhaps? That could imply that clicks were more universal previously? ... Possible, but this can also be explained without
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 1, 2007
              > http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/Phonetics%20II%20page%20four.htm
              > Note the association of clicks, tone changes in Khoisan lullabyes.
              > East Asians retain the 4 tones but lost the 4 click types. Why the
              > loss of the clicks? Less useful in humid-freshwater-terrestrial? Still
              > useful in arid (less exhaled moisture in respiration?) like sandy
              > beaches? Why change from click to consonant,

              Easier pronunciation perhaps? That could imply that clicks were more
              universal previously?

              > less aquatic so more air
              > available to waste? More mixing of nasal sound with oral sound?
              > Seems to me that separate nasal sound (hum) and oral sound (click)
              > converged post-AAT into modern mixture of language sounds.

              Possible, but this can also be explained without click+hum-sounds, eg, for
              diving or/& for suction feeding (outside or in the water).

              > Above surface back-floating: nasal tones, with oral 'sound effects"
              > Below surface forage-diving: oral clicks, non-nasal grunt/bark/quacks.
              > Of the hundreds of possible human sounds, which carry furthest under
              > surface? Which require least air lost? Which echo the best? Which
              > "fit" with flooded nostrils and ears?
              > Is it possible to hum and click simultaneously? Yes.
              > Is it possible to hum without losing air? No.
              > Is it possible to vocalize without losing air? Yes, by keeping lips
              > and soft palate close and filling the cheeks, then reinhaling from the
              > filled cheeks into the lungs, but this air is "used".
              > If you have sound card and speakers, you can hear the lullaby.
              > DD

              >>> I wonder how clicks correlate to: frequency (beats per minute), pitch,
              >>> Eustachian tube and affiliated muscles, swallowing, efficiency of
              >>> communication during breathhold, echolocation.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant#Click_genesis_and_click_loss

              >> Thanks for the link, DD.
              >> Syllables in human languages typically last 0.2" to 0.25", but 4/"
              >> is far too fast for underwaterclicks I guess?

              We may assume that speech speed gradually increased (after it had become
              speech).

              >> Perhaps 1/" or 1.2/" = heart beat?? Much slower?
              >> I have no idea about pitch. Can this be tested underwater? Can click
              >> languages give some clues?

              --Marc
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.