Re: Most phonetically beautiful sentence in a natlang
- 'So, the expression pronounced by females as "welda yoi wanda la
yoldia" would be pronounced by males as "ferta toi fanta la toldia".'
I wonder if at this point the two would be mutually unintillegible. They are some very big contrasts.
I think differences in pronunciation in women's and men's speech is quite a common thing, just as many languages have slight lexical differences as well. I know that Chinese woman frequently pronounce the alveolopalatal series <q j x> /ts\_h ts\ s\/ as [ts_jh ts_j s_j].
On 29/08/2013, at 1:53 AM, Leonardo Castro <leolucas1980@...> wrote:
> 2013/8/27 H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>:
>> ObConlang: do your conlang(s) have court-dictated (i.e., rigid) euphony
>> rules, or do they have more mellifluous euphony rules? (Or do they have
>> no euphony rules? Or no euphony whatsoever? :-P)
> I don't have a conlang with euphony rules, but once I outlined some
> phonotactic rules to what would be the most smooth, suave, soft
> language I could imagine. I have also considered to create a conlang
> with different pronunciations for males and females that could have
> been evolved from stereotypes of how females and males should speak (I
> wonder if there's anything remotely similar to this in natlangs
> [similar to the Nushu script phenomenon but afecting phoneme
> Some of the imagined sex-related phone changes are:
> In the beggining of words:
> M - F
> [v] -> [f] - [v] -> [w]
> [d] -> [t] - [d] -> [j]
> In the middle:
> [lt] -> [rt] - [lt] -> [ld]
> [nd] -> [nt] - [nd] -> [nd]
> So, the expression pronounced by females as "welda yoi wanda la
> yoldia" would be pronounced by males as "ferta toi fanta la toldia".
>> AFMCL, Ebisédian doesn't really have very much phonology to speak of; I
>> made it when I was young and inexperienced, and basically didn't put
>> very much thought into its phonological aspects. :) So there aren't any
>> euphony rules to speak of, though I did have somebody comment that the
>> proliferation of glottal stops, caused by the lack of any vowel glides,
>> makes it good for singing.
>> Tatari Faran has quite a number of phonological mutations to preserve
>> euphony. Euphony, however, is in the ear of the native speakers; it may
>> not correspond with *our* sense of aesthetics. :) Nevertheless, I think
>> TF does have some nice mutation rules, e.g.:
>> huna + na -> hunan da (vs. *huna na)
>> asusu + sei -> asusei (vs. *asusu sei)
>> panis + -is -> panitis (vs. *panisis)
>> pasanan + -an -> pasanaran (vs. *pasananan)
>> My new alienlang also has some mutation rules, but since it's still very
>> incomplete, I can't really say very much about its overall phonological
>> characteristics. One of its most prominent features is the
>> fricativisation of clusters of stops:
>> ehrlutek /'ExR\_0lUtEk/ -> ehrlutekmi /,ExR\_0lUtEx'mi/ (/k/ -> /x/)
>> apfat /'apfVt/ -> apfattek /'apfVTtEk/ (/t/ -> /T/)
>> gorl /'gOrl/ -> gorltai /'gOrKtaj/ (/l/ -> /K/)
>> This fricativisation may appear word-internally as well:
>> glett [glETt] (vs. *[glEt:])
> Fricativisation is something I like about Spanish /b/, /g/ and /d/
> that makes it somewhat more mellifluous.
>> Another feature is the lenition of /tu/ after /n/ or /N/:
>> bufen + -tu -> bufendu (vs. *bufentu)
>> cheŋ + -tu -> cheŋdu (vs. *cheŋtu)
>> I'd say both Tatari Faran and the alienlang have mellifluous mutation
>> rules, but "mellifluous" isn't exactly how I'd describe the alienlang,
>> what with its [r] / [xR\_0] contrast. :) That's a voiced alveolar trill
>> vs. a pre-fricativised voiceless uvular trill -- the latter imparts
>> quite a harsh feel to the language due to its frequent occurrence (e.g.,
>> in _ehrlu_ "tongue/speak", _ahr-_ "two-/double-", _hreis_ "three",
>> _shtehr_ "four", _hrvat_ "five" -- it's written as <hr>).
> BTW, I wonder what a language with the maximum quantity of harmonizing
> features would sound like (a challenge to someone?). For instance,
> imagine a language with
> * vowel harmony within words (maybe multidimensional: nasalization,
> ATR, roundness, etc.);
> * fricativisation and voicing of consonants when they occur intervocalic;
> * suppression of any consonant cluster involving two non-nasal stops;
> * clustering of nasal stops only with their homorganic;
> * clustering of liquid consonants only with their homorganic;
> * what more can I suggest?
- 2013/8/29 Roger Mills <romiltz@...>:
> Somewhere in my ancient research I read of a tribal language in Indonesia where the men pronounced the /s/ phoneme as [s]. while the women used [h]. I don't think that would lead to too much confusion.Just imagine that, for some random fashion, it starts to be considered
> Robin Lakoff, years ago, and Deborah Tannen (IIRC) have pointed out different intonation patterns for women in Amer.English.
"cute" to pronounce non-flapped intervocalic "t" and to omit final "r"
in AmE . So, women could start to pronounce "better" as [b'Et@] while
men would avoid this "non-masculine" pronunciation and pronounce
Actually, there is at least one pronunciation features apparently more
associated with young females in BrP, the elongation of nasals; listen
to people imitating it in the following video, at times 4:15 and 5:07:
This video shows the parts of two interviews with humorists where they
imitate several BrP regional accents. They are somewhat exaggerated
the most typical regional features, but I think that the imitations
really give a good idea of what the real accents sound.
(I had previously sent this message only to Roger but I intended to
send to the list.)
> From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <tsela.cg@...>
> To: CONLANG@...
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 5:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Most phonetically beautiful sentence in a natlang
> On 29 August 2013 11:04, Alex Fink <000024@...> wrote:
>> The language is now called Garifuna, and apparently most of the
>> speaker-gender contrasts are obsolescent, though it seems to still survive
>> robustly enough in the singular pronouns: men have 1sg _au_, 2sg _amürü_,
>> 3sg _ligía_, women 1sg _nugía_ 2sg _bugía_ 3sg _tugía_. (_ü_ is /1/ I
> Such speaker-gender contrast can be very stable actually. Cue for instance
> Japanese, where it's well known that males and females will use different
> sets of personal pronouns (although some personal pronouns are somewhat
> neutral and can be used by both). It goes further, with differences in
> grammar and lexicon as well, although one cannot talk about different
> Gender "diglossia" is not an unknown phenomenon, although it usually
> appears as dialectical differences at most (slight phonological and grammar
> changes, often different lexemes as used by men and women). Typically men
> will know the women's dialect and vice-versa, but they'll never speak it,
> except when quoting a member of the opposite sex.
> Such a phenomenon appears usually in societies with very strict gender role
> distinctions, especially ones where men and women don't often interact with
> each other. The relative isolation of the male and female communities
> results in effectively two partially separate linguistic groups, whose
> lects start to diverge. The strict distinction in gender roles and
> behaviours in the culture ensures that the divergence stays stable: the
> different speech patterns become seen as part of the male or female
> identity. And indeed, I read that in societies where such diglossia used to
> be common and stable for centuries, a change in cultural behaviour in the
> form of a loss of the traditional gender role distinctions will usually
> result in a (quite rapid) loss of the male and female language
> distinctions: the two dialects will merge again in a single form, although
> some small differences may linger longer than others.
> Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.