Re: Conlangs and English Language History
On 30/04/2013 19:37, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Why was <grk>u</grk> fronted, though? Was it part of a
> chain-shift type shift?
Not obviously so.
> Also, did it pass through intermediate POAs or was there
> some other kind of process?
Your guess is probably as good any anyone else's. It was a
feature originally of the Ionic dialect, but because Attic
(the dialect of Athens) was a sub-dialect of Ionic and
Athens came to exert such a strong cultural influence, the
Ionic pronunciation eventually formed the basis of the
internationalized Koine and the rest, as they say, is history.
Why did Vulgar Latin /u/ shift to /y/ in Old French? Why do
we hear English /u/ pronounced [ʉ] in some British regions?
Why did early Welsh [u] shift (presumably) to [ʉ] before
becoming unrounded [ɨ].
FWIW one theory that I have seen put forward is that there
is less room between the back of the tongue and the palate
to accommodate such a range of vowels as those that can be
made at the front of the mouth, and this tends to make /u/
shift out of place to make more room.
Whatever the reason, the shift of [u] --> [ʉ] --> [y] is not
> I've never quite understood why in many languages
> palatized [k] tends to become something like [ts] or
> [tS] rather than, say, [c]. Why are the intermediate
> POAs skipped?
My guess is that they probably aren't.
> (Or are palatals inherently unstable and tend to
> gravitate towards alveolars rather quickly?)
Certainly there is a marked preference for languages to
prefer an affricate of some kind, rather than plain [c].
"language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
for individual beings and events."
[Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
- 2013/4/30 Herman Miller <hmiller@...>:
> On 4/30/2013 12:38 PM, Leonardo Castro wrote:Nice! I have already considered <ñ> or <ŋ> for /ŋ/ and <ñ> or <~> for
>> 2013/4/30 BPJ<bpj@...>:
>>> 2013-04-30 13:49, Leonardo Castro skrev:
>>>> BTW, does anyone have a system that distinguishes /n/, /m/, /N/ and a
>>>> general nasal stop /~/ with Roman characters?
>>> You mean nasalization like in French or Portuguese I suppose,
>>> coz that's what /~/ is.
>> I meant a nasal stop that has the same place of articulation as the
>> following consonant. That is, it "absorbs" the place of articulation
>> of the following consonant.
> Sounds like anusvara in Indic languages, which can be represented as m with
> a dot under it (ṃ). If you're using <ṃ>, you might as well also use <ṅ> (n
> with dot above) for /ŋ/.
> In Yasaro romanization I use <ñ> for homorganic nasals and <ŋ> (eng) for
homorganic nasals. I think your choices are probably the best looking;
"teñki" looks a lot better than "te~ki". There's also the option of
letting <n> always stand for homorganic nasals before consonants and
for /n/ before vowels, if you conlang doesn't have minimal pairs that
cause ambiguity in this system.