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

"Tracheal" consonants: a curiosity?

Expand Messages
  • François CHAUVET
    Hello, I was designing the phonetic inventory for a Conlang (no name yet), which I wished would correspond to my (somewhat) unarticulated natural voice (in
    Message 1 of 18 , Jun 1, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello,

      I was designing the phonetic inventory for a Conlang (no name yet), which
      I wished would

      correspond to my (somewhat) unarticulated natural voice (in fact, I can
      speak French almost

      without moving my lips). This is how I speak, and microphones are no help:
      they just amplify

      what does not exist.
      So, I chose to have "semi-rounded" vowels (easy, although I don't know of
      any IPA symbol for

      them). As for consonants, I kept bilabials because they are very primary
      sound, but moved

      alveaolars back to retroflexes, and velars back to uvulars. I hesitated
      about pharyngeals:

      while I have many Arab friends who pronounce them without difficulty, I
      never could; but I

      kept them as a possibility (maybe dialectal?). And that was OK, with a bit
      of training.
      (BTW, I also envisioned accepting clicks, which are not that difficult --
      but that would

      have made a huge phonetic inventory).

      But then came a car crash (BTW, never ever forget to fasten your seat
      belt). I had my whole

      oesophagus and stomach removed, my pharynx was shortened, and I had to use
      a tracheostomic

      canula to breathe, during over 8 months. Now I'm all right, thanks.
      But the opening in my trachea is not yet closed. There is a thin skin over
      it, which will

      take several months to re-become plain skin.

      The consequences of it are (1) pharyngeals are well beyond my reach, and
      (2) I can now

      articulate what I call "tracheal consonants" -- namely a plosive which I
      could denote by

      [q\\] and a fricative which I could denote by [X\\]. Both are unvoiced,
      but since the vocal

      chords were left untouched, there is still some air left to make a voiced
      version of these

      (although much less voiced than a real pulmonar voiced consonant).
      I'm trying to make some record (MP3 or other) of these sounds; but I don't
      like my voice on

      record (It is at least half an octave higher-pitched than what I can hear
      through the sull

      bones). Since it is obviously difficult to find someone having had the
      same surgery AND

      interested in conlanging...

      Now, is this a pure curiosity? Are there any natlangs with such
      consonants? These do

      resemble glottals, but aren't: can they be considered allophones, e.g.
      [q\\] as allophone of

      [?]? The medics don't understand why I seem so interested in producing
      such "noises" (I must

      admit they sound like eructation when improperly pronounced). How
      far "back in the throat"

      is it possible to utter some "reasonable" consonant?

      Thank you for any advice.
    • Benct Philip Jonsson
      ... I speak with lax oral articulation, tense throat and nasal overlay, but at least there is a known medical reason. It never occurred to me to make a
      Message 2 of 18 , Jun 1, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        François CHAUVET skrev:
        > Hello,
        >
        > I was designing the phonetic inventory for a Conlang (no name yet), which
        > I wished would
        >
        > correspond to my (somewhat) unarticulated natural voice (in fact, I can
        > speak French almost
        >
        > without moving my lips). This is how I speak, and microphones are no help:
        > they just amplify

        I speak with lax oral articulation, tense throat and nasal overlay,
        but at least there is a known medical reason. It never occurred to
        me to make a conlang with those characteristics, but it seems an
        interesting idea!

        > what does not exist.
        > So, I chose to have "semi-rounded" vowels (easy, although I don't know of
        > any IPA symbol for

        Why not use the "less rounded" diacritic ("subscript c"):
        CXS [u_c o_c y_c 2_c]
        IPA [u̜ o̜ y̜ ø̜]
        >
        [snip]

        > The consequences of it are (1) pharyngeals are well beyond my reach, and
        > (2) I can now
        >
        > articulate what I call "tracheal consonants" -- namely a plosive which I
        > could denote by
        >
        > [q\\] and a fricative which I could denote by [X\\]. Both are unvoiced,
        > but since the vocal
        >
        > chords were left untouched, there is still some air left to make a voiced
        > version of these
        [snip]
        > Now, is this a pure curiosity? Are there any natlangs with such
        > consonants? These do
        >
        > resemble glottals, but aren't: can they be considered allophones, e.g.
        > [q\\] as allophone of
        >
        > [?]? The medics don't understand why I seem so interested in producing
        > such "noises" (I must
        >
        > admit they sound like eructation when improperly pronounced). How
        > far "back in the throat"
        >
        > is it possible to utter some "reasonable" consonant?
        >
        > Thank you for any advice.

        Are you sure that these are not epiglottals? Just because
        60% of the human race are unable to ptonounce such sounds
        doesn't mean that you aren't among the remaining 40%.

        --

        /BP 8^)>
        --
        Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

        Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
        (Tacitus)
      • Paul Roser
        ... [edit] ... First, there is nothing especially different in the shape of the epiglottis in the speakers of those languages which use it as part of their
        Message 3 of 18 , Jun 2, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 20:53:51 -0400, # 1 <salut_vous_autre@...> wrote:

          >Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
          >
          >>Are you sure that these are not epiglottals? Just because
          >>60% of the human race are unable to ptonounce such sounds
          >>doesn't mean that you aren't among the remaining 40%.
          >>
          [edit]
          >But what languages use these sounds? In my ears and mouth,
          >this is not a sound that sounds really beautiful or that is
          >pleasant to produce...
          >
          >So two questions: What languages or languages families use
          >this sound? And do the people who use this sound in everyday
          >speach have a different form of epiglottis or throat?
          >
          >- Max


          First, there is nothing especially different in the shape of the
          epiglottis in the speakers of those languages which use it as
          part of their language, as far as I know (though one professor who
          worked with Khoisan speakers reported that muscles in his throat
          became more developed/enlarged, apparently from using these speech
          sounds).

          As to which languages use epiglottals - they have been reported to
          occur in Arabic, Salishan languages, Nootka, Somali, some Caucasian
          languages, Dahalo (East Africa), Amis (Taiwan) - in fact many
          instances previously reported as pharyngeals may in fact be realized
          at least allophonically as epiglottals.

          Epiglottalized vowels (as opposed to true epiglottal segments) have
          also been reported in Ju|hoansi & !Xoo (both Khoesan) as well as
          in Bai (Tibeto-Burman), and probably others that I can't recall off
          the top of my head.


          -Bfowol
        • Paul Bennett
          ... From: # 1 ... That s simply not how genetic evolution works, though it is how Lamarkian evolution works, which was a fairly
          Message 4 of 18 , Jun 2, 2005
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: # 1 <salut_vous_autre@...>
            > Yeah that's what I mean, using such sound modifies the throat...
            > (a genetic
            > particularity inherited from succecive generations of epiglottis
            > users?Anyway ,that's not really important...)

            That's simply not how genetic evolution works, though it is how
            Lamarkian evolution works, which was a fairly dominant theory before
            genetics as a science came to the fore.

            The simple fact is that (aside from a few extreme situations) the
            environment does not shape the existing genes of a living creature. If
            there were a situation where passing on your genes to the next
            generation depended on your ability to produce epiglottal consonants, I
            could agree, but I find it quite hard to construct a plausible scenario
            where that would be the case.



            Paul
          • Paul Roser
            ... Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language Agul contrast pharyngeal and epiglottal (and perhaps glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal contrast
            Message 5 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 17:53:04 -0400, # 1 <salut_vous_autre@...> wrote:

              >>As to which languages use epiglottals - they have been reported to
              >>occur in Arabic, Salishan languages, Nootka, Somali, some Caucasian
              >>languages, Dahalo (East Africa), Amis (Taiwan) - in fact many
              >>instances previously reported as pharyngeals may in fact be realized
              >>at least allophonically as epiglottals.
              >>
              >
              >Are there oppositions between pharyngal and epiglottal consonants?
              >
              >Or pharyngal, glottal, and epiglottal consonants?

              Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language Agul contrast pharyngeal
              and epiglottal (and perhaps glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal
              contrast would be possible, since it is a variant of glottal/pharyngeal.

              >
              >>Epiglottalized vowels (as opposed to true epiglottal segments) have
              >>also been reported in Ju|hoansi & !Xoo (both Khoesan) as well as
              >>in Bai (Tibeto-Burman), and probably others that I can't recall off
              >>the top of my head.
              >>
              >
              >Isn't an epiglottalized vowels the same as a creaky voiced vowel? if not
              >does it sound similar and is there a X-Sampa symbol?

              They are nothing alike - creaky voiced (or glottalized) vowels contrast
              with epiglottalized vowels in several Khoesan languages, and I don't
              think they sound similar at all. There is no X-Sampa symbol for
              epiglottalized that I am aware of, though you could use a raised
              epiglottal (stop or fricative?) which is what I've seen in the IPA
              literature, so maybe _?\ would serve.

              Bfowol
            • Henrik Theiling
              Hi! ... Ah indeed! I remember. http://hctv.humnet.ucla.edu/departments/linguistics/VowelsandConsonants/appendix/languages/agul/agul.html Unfortunately, the
              Message 6 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi!

                Paul Roser <pkroser@...> writes:
                >...
                > >Are there oppositions between pharyngal and epiglottal consonants?
                > >
                > >Or pharyngal, glottal, and epiglottal consonants?
                >
                > Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language Agul contrast pharyngeal
                > and epiglottal...

                Ah indeed! I remember.

                http://hctv.humnet.ucla.edu/departments/linguistics/VowelsandConsonants/appendix/languages/agul/agul.html

                Unfortunately, the sound quality is quite poor.

                >... (and perhaps glottal).

                No, I think it doesn't. I also think I saw a postulation somewhere
                that no language contrasts all three POAs.

                **Henrik
              • Joseph Bridwell
                ... While gooling for caucasian languages , I ran across this: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/U/Ub/Ubykh_language.htm Is this for real? I can t
                Message 7 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language
                  > Agul contrast pharyngeal and epiglottal (and perhaps
                  > glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal contrast
                  > would be possible, since it is a variant of
                  > glottal/pharyngeal.

                  While gooling for "caucasian languages", I ran across this:

                  http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/U/Ub/Ubykh_language.htm

                  Is this for real? I can't make half these sounds, let alone hear the
                  differences.
                • Benct Philip Jonsson
                  ... Sure it s real. BTW the real page is -- /BP 8^) -- Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Joseph Bridwell skrev:
                    >>Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language
                    >>Agul contrast pharyngeal and epiglottal (and perhaps
                    >>glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal contrast
                    >>would be possible, since it is a variant of
                    >>glottal/pharyngeal.
                    >
                    >
                    > While gooling for "caucasian languages", I ran across this:
                    >
                    > http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/U/Ub/Ubykh_language.htm
                    >
                    > Is this for real? I can't make half these sounds, let alone hear the
                    > differences.
                    >
                    >

                    Sure it's real. BTW the real page is
                    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubykh_language>

                    --

                    /BP 8^)>
                    --
                    Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

                    Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
                    (Tacitus)
                  • william drewery
                    Benct Philip Jonsson wrote: ... Both Arabic and Oriental Hebrew contrast all three. The difference between epiglottal and pharangeal
                    Message 9 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment


                      Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...> wrote:

                      Joseph Bridwell skrev:
                      >>Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language
                      >>Agul contrast pharyngeal and epiglottal (and perhaps
                      >>glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal contrast
                      >>would be possible, since it is a variant of
                      >>glottal/pharyngeal.

                      Both Arabic and Oriental Hebrew contrast all three. The difference between epiglottal and pharangeal consonants is akin to the difference between trilled r's as in Spanish and retroflex glide r's as in American English. To pronounce a pharangeal fricative, the aryetenoid cartilidges pull up and around the base of the epiglottis, pushing it back some while the pharangeal cavity is tensed and slightly constricted. There is nearly always tounge root retraction. Epiglottals are essentially exagerated pharangeals. The aryetenoids pull all the way around the base of the epiglottis, pushing it into contact with the back of the throat, then the aryetenoids trill against its base as air flows laterally around the epiglottis. The sound is more constricted than a pharangeal, and is accompanied by a throaty rattle (think of Grover off Sesame Street, or Fats Domino). "Voiceless" epiglottal fricatives nearly always occur with a breathy-voice phonation as the vocal chords vibrate passiv! ely due to the energy of the aryetenoids. That's how epiglottal phonation works, as in !Xoo. The sound resembles breathy-voice with tounge-root retraction or pharangealization, and there's that rattle again. Nothing like creaky-voice. In fact, that rattle in Garth Brooks voice when he sings Shameless, or that vocal roll that a lot of Jazz singers do, are all examples of epiglottal ficatives.

                       Epiglottal stops are the same as ejective pharangeal stops. The glottis closes completely, while the tounge root retracts so far as to completely seal around the epilottis. The sound is similar to a forcefull glottal stop with a pharangeal offglide. In most of spoken Arabic, there's the ordinary glottal stop, the voiceless pharangeal fricative, a voiced pharangeal approximate for the single @ayn, and a full epiglottal stop for doubled @ayn. Doubled Haa' (voiceless pharangeal fricative) often has aryetenoid trilling, as well. The Oriental dialects of Hebrew follow a similar pattern. Agul is the only language i know of contrasting voiceless pharangeals with voiceless epiglottals. But !Xoo contrast pharangealized vowels, epiglottalized vowels, and creaky vowels, and also has the glottal stop as a consonant.
                      William Drewery


                      Yahoo! Mail
                      Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
                    • (no author)
                      ... In Vbazi I use /N/ (represented by |q|) in the words that imply negativeness no = qi nobody = qit (nominative form) nowhere = bjakq (syllabic /N/)
                      Message 10 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        René Uittenbogaard wrote:

                        >David J. Peterson wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Though, another idea I'm having too late is showing where a given
                        > > conlanger creates their *own* sound symbolism.
                        >
                        >[snip]
                        >
                        > > All these words have to do with brightness or whiteness, and
                        > > all have some sort of palatal in them (and a lot have that /tw/
                        > > phone).
                        > >
                        > > Anyway, have any others done things like this? Or perhaps a
                        > > better question: Those who have done this (intentionally or
                        > > unintentionally), would you care to share? The lecture's done
                        > > with, but it'd still be cool to hear about.
                        >
                        >Calénnawn uses |h|+vowel for negative words like nothing, no one,
                        >nowhere, never, etc. e.g.
                        >
                        >hort zero
                        >hið none of
                        >hi no
                        >hes not
                        >huy- the opposite of
                        >hépla not any more; not yet (depending on other words)
                        >
                        >and compounds like:
                        >
                        >bey hort never
                        >fond hort nothing
                        >cas hort no one
                        >
                        >
                        >René

                        In Vbazi I use /N/ (represented by |q|) in the words that imply negativeness

                        no = qi

                        nobody = qit (nominative form)
                        nowhere = bjakq (syllabic /N/)
                        nothing = taq
                        never = -waq- (it is an auxiliary so it conjugates)

                        for making a verb negative = (l)aq (a "l" if the previous word ends with a
                        vowel)

                        for making an auxiliary negative = (l)yq (|y| = /E/)

                        for making a modal prefix negative = waq, vdyq, qe, yheq
                        (the word used will depend of the number there are and which
                        one is negative)

                        nullar = qe (before the noun)
                        also used to answer "none" to a "how many..." question

                        - Max
                      • (no author)
                        ... And another symbolism I have found is in feelings feeling: vav sadness: vavjedz anger: vavletik happyness: vavnyl (nyl is also used with the words for
                        Message 11 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          >René Uittenbogaard wrote:
                          >
                          >>David J. Peterson wrote:
                          >> >
                          >> > Though, another idea I'm having too late is showing where a given
                          >> > conlanger creates their *own* sound symbolism.
                          >>
                          >>[snip]
                          >>
                          >> > All these words have to do with brightness or whiteness, and
                          >> > all have some sort of palatal in them (and a lot have that /tw/
                          >> > phone).
                          >> >
                          >> > Anyway, have any others done things like this? Or perhaps a
                          >> > better question: Those who have done this (intentionally or
                          >> > unintentionally), would you care to share? The lecture's done
                          >> > with, but it'd still be cool to hear about.
                          >>
                          >>Calénnawn uses |h|+vowel for negative words like nothing, no one,
                          >>nowhere, never, etc. e.g.
                          >>
                          >>hort zero
                          >>hið none of
                          >>hi no
                          >>hes not
                          >>huy- the opposite of
                          >>hépla not any more; not yet (depending on other words)
                          >>
                          >>and compounds like:
                          >>
                          >>bey hort never
                          >>fond hort nothing
                          >>cas hort no one
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>René
                          >
                          >In Vbazi I use /N/ (represented by |q|) in the words that imply
                          >negativeness
                          >
                          >no = qi
                          >
                          >nobody = qit (nominative form)
                          >nowhere = bjakq (syllabic /N/)
                          >nothing = taq
                          >never = -waq- (it is an auxiliary so it conjugates)
                          >
                          >for making a verb negative = (l)aq (a "l" if the previous word ends with
                          >a
                          >vowel)
                          >
                          >for making an auxiliary negative = (l)yq (|y| = /E/)
                          >
                          >for making a modal prefix negative = waq, vdyq, qe, yheq
                          > (the word used will depend of the number there are and which
                          >one is negative)
                          >
                          >nullar = qe (before the noun)
                          > also used to answer "none" to a "how many..." question

                          And another symbolism I have found is in feelings

                          feeling: vav

                          sadness: vavjedz
                          anger: vavletik
                          happyness: vavnyl

                          (nyl is also used with the words for "day", "night"... to say "good day" =
                          "vinyl" , "good night" = "gynyl" etc..)

                          satisfaction: vavnyljeb
                          desire: vavez
                          pain: vavkit
                          boredom: vavwil
                          nostalgia: vavjedzwil
                          impatience: vavgazdyi
                          revolt: vavqaln (still the idea of negativeness)

                          But love and hate are exceptions, they respectively are "kaivb" and "gwaib"

                          >
                          >- Max
                        • Joe
                          ... Ubykh is a wonderful language! Now unfortunately extinct, but it would be possible to revive it, possibly.
                          Message 12 of 18 , Jun 6, 2005
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Joseph Bridwell wrote:

                            >>Allegedly some dialects of the Caucasian language
                            >>Agul contrast pharyngeal and epiglottal (and perhaps
                            >>glottal). Certainly a glottal/epiglottal contrast
                            >>would be possible, since it is a variant of
                            >>glottal/pharyngeal.
                            >>
                            >>
                            >
                            >While gooling for "caucasian languages", I ran across this:
                            >
                            >http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/U/Ub/Ubykh_language.htm
                            >
                            >Is this for real? I can't make half these sounds, let alone hear the
                            >differences.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >

                            Ubykh is a wonderful language! Now unfortunately extinct, but it would
                            be possible to revive it, possibly.
                          • Steg Belsky
                            ... For the single pharyngeal phonemes, sure, but Hebrew phonotactics doesn t allow geminated gutturals, and the guttural category includes ... -Stephen (Steg)
                            Message 13 of 18 , Jun 7, 2005
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Jun 7, 2005, at 3:19 AM, william drewery wrote:
                              >>  Epiglottal stops are the same as ejective pharangeal stops. The
                              >> glottis closes completely, while the tounge root retracts so far as
                              >> to completely seal around the epilottis. The sound is similar to a
                              >> forcefull glottal stop with a pharangeal offglide. In most of spoken
                              >> Arabic, there's the ordinary glottal stop, the voiceless pharangeal
                              >> fricative, a voiced pharangeal approximate for the single @ayn, and a
                              >> full epiglottal stop for doubled @ayn. Doubled Haa' (voiceless
                              >> pharangeal fricative) often has aryetenoid trilling, as well. The
                              >> Oriental dialects of Hebrew follow a similar pattern. Agul is the
                              >> only language i know of contrasting voiceless pharangeals with
                              >> voiceless epiglottals. But !Xoo contrast pharangealized vowels,
                              >> epiglottalized vowels, and creaky vowels, and also has the glottal
                              >> stop as a consonant.
                              >> William Drewery

                              For the single pharyngeal phonemes, sure, but Hebrew phonotactics
                              doesn't allow geminated gutturals, and the guttural category includes
                              |hhet| and |`ayin|.


                              -Stephen (Steg)
                              "i defend myself, therefore i exist."
                              ~ herbert pagani
                            • william drewery
                              You re right about the hebrew, sorry. Arabic also often avoids geminate gutterals, but allows them time to time. I wonder if it s because they re difficault to
                              Message 14 of 18 , Jun 8, 2005
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                You're right about the hebrew, sorry. Arabic also often avoids geminate gutterals, but allows them time to time. I wonder if it's because they're difficault to pronounce, or because noone wants to hear those sounds for longer than one has to, lol.

                                Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...> wrote:
                                On Jun 7, 2005, at 3:19 AM, william drewery wrote:
                                >>  Epiglottal stops are the same as ejective pharangeal stops. The
                                >> glottis closes completely, while the tounge root retracts so far as
                                >> to completely seal around the epilottis. The sound is similar to a
                                >> forcefull glottal stop with a pharangeal offglide. In most of spoken
                                >> Arabic, there's the ordinary glottal stop, the voiceless pharangeal
                                >> fricative, a voiced pharangeal approximate for the single @ayn, and a
                                >> full epiglottal stop for doubled @ayn. Doubled Haa' (voiceless
                                >> pharangeal fricative) often has aryetenoid trilling, as well. The
                                >> Oriental dialects of Hebrew follow a similar pattern. Agul is the
                                >> only language i know of contrasting voiceless pharangeals with
                                >> voiceless epiglottals. But !Xoo con! trast pharangealized vowels,
                                >> epiglottalized vowels, and creaky vowels, and also has the glottal
                                >> stop as a consonant.
                                >> William Drewery

                                For the single pharyngeal phonemes, sure, but Hebrew phonotactics
                                doesn't allow geminated gutturals, and the guttural category includes
                                |hhet| and |`ayin|.


                                -Stephen (Steg)
                                "i defend myself, therefore i exist."
                                ~ herbert pagani

                                __________________________________________________
                                Do You Yahoo!?
                                Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                                http://mail.yahoo.com

                              • (no author)
                                ... About how much time a sound change takes to occur yeah it s obvious that it take a generation I more interested by the number of them that can occur ...
                                Message 15 of 18 , Jun 8, 2005
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Muke Tever wrote:

                                  ># 1 <salut_vous_autre@...> wrote:
                                  >>I have a question concerning the sound changes occuring in the languages
                                  >>
                                  >>I thought of creating a list of sound changes for my conlang (It could
                                  >>remove the regularity that I don't like in Vbazi)
                                  >>
                                  >>But I didn't know how much..
                                  >>
                                  >>How much sound changes may occur naturaly in languages in a gived period
                                  >>of
                                  >>time?
                                  >
                                  >One sound change is probably not going to take less than one generation,
                                  >or about thirty years.
                                  >

                                  About how much time a sound change takes to occur yeah it's obvious that it
                                  take a generation I more interested by the number of them that can occur

                                  >You could have several sound changes going at once, but I wouldn't set
                                  >up a sound change dependent on an earlier change any sooner than that.
                                  >

                                  And, like I just said, How much independant sound changes may occur in a
                                  single generation

                                  Or, how much changes could have occured in a language in a century? 500
                                  years? a millenium?

                                  Could we hear a great diference between one who spoke English two centuries
                                  ago somewhere and those who speak it now at the same place?

                                  I said I thought about:

                                  "/h/ between 2 vowels or at the
                                  end of a word becomes /x/, /dz/ becomes /D/, /hw/ -> /p\/, /bv/ -> /B/"

                                  And there are 12 others I've already created, but so much changes could
                                  probably not occur in a single generation, even if they are all
                                  independant..

                                  >(Unless, say, there is some kind of cultural factor fast-tracking sound
                                  >changes...)
                                  >

                                  Is it possible?

                                  > *Muke!

                                  - Max
                                • John Vertical
                                  ... Wait - did I understand this right? Epiglottals and pharyngeals are essentially the same POA, with epiglottal approximants equaling pharyngeal fricatives??
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Jun 17, 2005
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, william drewery wrote:
                                    >To pronounce a pharangeal fricative, the aryetenoid cartilidges pull up and
                                    >around the base of the
                                    >epiglottis, pushing it back some while the pharangeal cavity is tensed and
                                    >slightly constricted. There is
                                    >nearly always tounge root retraction. Epiglottals are essentially
                                    >exagerated pharangeals. The aryetenoids
                                    >pull all the way around the base of the epiglottis, pushing it into contact
                                    >with the back of the throat,
                                    >then the aryetenoids trill against its base as air flows laterally around
                                    >the epiglottis.
                                    ...
                                    > Epiglottal stops are the same as ejective pharangeal stops. The glottis
                                    >closes completely, while the tounge root retracts so far as to completely
                                    >seal around the epilottis.

                                    Wait - did I understand this right? Epiglottals and pharyngeals are
                                    essentially the same POA, with epiglottal approximants equaling pharyngeal
                                    fricatives??
                                    (and I guess that would make pharyngeal apprxs. epig. vowels then? :))

                                    John Vertical

                                    _________________________________________________________________
                                    Lataa ilmainen MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.fi
                                  • (no author)
                                    ... The numeral system is in 20, so I could divide in 20 hours.. or 40 hours, 20 before noon, 20 after I could call those hour by a name create by contractions
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Jun 17, 2005
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Ray Brown wrote:


                                      >How do these people count? In tens, by dozens, in twenties or what? Surely
                                      >this would have some baring on how they divided day (and night).
                                      >

                                      The numeral system is in 20, so I could divide in 20 hours.. or 40 hours, 20
                                      before noon, 20 after

                                      I could call those hour by a name create by contractions of the coresponding
                                      number pasted to the word for before/after noon

                                      I have to choose if these divisions should be only for the light time or the
                                      whole sun cycle.


                                      2 questions come to my mind now with that discution:

                                      Did all the cultures of the world noticed that the duration of the day
                                      varies among the year and is not constant?

                                      Did all the cultures noticed that there is a year? There are probably places
                                      where there is no visible variation of seasons


                                      If I think more, is it really important to calculate durations shorter than
                                      a day? A lot of cultures don't care about time. If my people are, as I said,
                                      independant of the rest of the world, caculating time with so much precision
                                      isn't important...


                                      Hey that's hard to create a conlang without a culture behind, a conculture
                                      or the culture of the world for an auxlang, I always have to think if such
                                      word would not be too much linked to my culture to keep only words that
                                      could fit anywhere on the world...

                                      - Max
                                    • Chris Bates
                                      In a book I was reading recently ( THe sounds of the world s languages ) I seem to remember it say that sounds labelled pharyngeal in most languages are in
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Jun 17, 2005
                                      View Source
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        In a book I was reading recently ("THe sounds of the world's languages")
                                        I seem to remember it say that sounds labelled pharyngeal in most
                                        languages are in fact epiglottal, but there are rare languages with true
                                        pharyngeal sounds. I might go look it up in the book now...

                                        >
                                        > Wait - did I understand this right? Epiglottals and pharyngeals are
                                        > essentially the same POA, with epiglottal approximants equaling
                                        > pharyngeal
                                        > fricatives??
                                        > (and I guess that would make pharyngeal apprxs. epig. vowels then? :))
                                        >
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.