Sound Change Quickie Thread

[bradrn]

Here's another dissertation: Gouskova (2003) [pdf] on syncope.

That article looks very interesting as well, but it looks very jargony - I can't understand it because I don't know Optimality Theory. Could you give a summary, or at least point me to some resources to help understand it?

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

[dhok]

Here's another dissertation: Gouskova (2003) [pdf] on syncope.

That article looks very interesting as well, but it looks very jargony - I can't understand it because I don't know Optimality Theory. Could you give a summary, or at least point me to some resources to help understand it?

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

This is definitely plausible. Another option is to drop all but the very first consonant in a cluster, which occurred in Menominee; the rest of the cluster is then restored in inflection (e.g. mata:s 'poison ivy', pl. mata:skon, from *mataškwi or thereabouts--I can't find any Meskwaki cognates and I lost my Delaware dictionary in a hostel in Brussels.)

[náʼoolkiłí]

Here's another dissertation: Gouskova (2003) [pdf] on syncope.

That article looks very interesting as well, but it looks very jargony - I can't understand it because I don't know Optimality Theory. Could you give a summary, or at least point me to some resources to help understand it.

Indeed it's quite theoretical, but I think you should still be able to extract empirical generalizations from the sections titled The Patterns. She describes what goes on without using any theoretical machinery. But I can also share some resources if you're interested in learning about OT — it's actually a very simple and intuitive theory, at least at its core.

[Tropylium]

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

Yes, quite. Thus e.g. Estonian: *sɤpra > *sɤpr > sõber (oblique stem sõbra(-)) 'friend', or Hungarian: *ykry > *ʏkr > ökör (stem ökr(ö)-) 'bull'.

Vowel deletion conditional on the consonant environment is plausible too, though often you end up with some more narrow condition like V > ∅ / C₁_C₂# when C₂ is an obstruent and C₁ is a sonorant (which would mean things like *-wVm, *-sVk remain instead of turning into **-wm, **-sk).

[StrangerCoug]

Also, really for my information more than anything else: Since there are no voicing contrasts until the implosives become regular voiced stops and merge with the allophonically voiced tennis stops, is it plausible with my phonotactics to have allophonically devoiced implosives? If so, where?

Anyone?

[Zaarin]

Also, really for my information more than anything else: Since there are no voicing contrasts until the implosives become regular voiced stops and merge with the allophonically voiced tennis stops, is it plausible with my phonotactics to have allophonically devoiced implosives? If so, where?

Anyone?

Word-final devoicing or devoicing adjacent to a voiceless stop are common enough for regular plosives, but I'm really not familiar enough with implosives to guess if that's also true for them.

[Vijay]

I haven't read this thread very carefully, but word-final devoicing of implosives seems pretty common in Mayan languages. I'm pretty sure it happens in Kaqchikel in particular.

[bradrn]

Also, really for my information more than anything else: Since there are no voicing contrasts until the implosives become regular voiced stops and merge with the allophonically voiced tennis stops, is it plausible with my phonotactics to have allophonically devoiced implosives? If so, where?

Anyone?

I'm sure that I saw an example of allophonic implosive devoicing a couple of days ago on Wikipedia. Can't find it now though.

[Pabappa]

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

I dont believe in that, no. With a sonorant like /r/ i can see that happening as in estonian .... Estonian might be your best model to follow, in fact. see which consonant clusters they allow and which ones they split up. and which ones (if any) do not drop following vowels at all.

I would just retain the final vowel here. atɣe > atɣe, no change. if not, i'd do atɣe > atɣ > atʰ > at (unless aspiration is distinctive).

[bradrn]

Here's another dissertation: Gouskova (2003) [pdf] on syncope.

That article looks very interesting as well, but it looks very jargony - I can't understand it because I don't know Optimality Theory. Could you give a summary, or at least point me to some resources to help understand it?

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

This is definitely plausible. Another option is to drop all but the very first consonant in a cluster, which occurred in Menominee; the rest of the cluster is then restored in inflection (e.g. mata:s 'poison ivy', pl. mata:skon, from *mataškwi or thereabouts--I can't find any Meskwaki cognates and I lost my Delaware dictionary in a hostel in Brussels.)

That's a really nice solution! I got heavily criticised for a similar change though, so what makes this one inherently more plausible? (Well, other than the fact that it actually is attested...)

[bradrn]

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

I dont believe in that, no. With a sonorant like /r/ i can see that happening as in estonian .... Estonian might be your best model to follow, in fact. see which consonant clusters they allow and which ones they split up. and which ones (if any) do not drop following vowels at all.

It does sound like Estonian would be my best model. But I'm not sure how I would even go about finding information on Estonian diachronics! Do you have any resources?

I would just retain the final vowel here.

Possibly, but my question asked about what would happen given that this change has already occurred?

i'd do atɣe > atɣ > atʰ > at (unless aspiration is distinctive).

/atɣe/ was just an example made of the first sounds I could think of.

[cedh]

That article looks very interesting as well, but it looks very jargony - I can't understand it because I don't know Optimality Theory. Could you give a summary, or at least point me to some resources to help understand it?

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

This is definitely plausible. Another option is to drop all but the very first consonant in a cluster, which occurred in Menominee; the rest of the cluster is then restored in inflection (e.g. mata:s 'poison ivy', pl. mata:skon, from *mataškwi or thereabouts--I can't find any Meskwaki cognates and I lost my Delaware dictionary in a hostel in Brussels.)

That's a really nice solution! I got heavily criticised for a similar change though, so what makes this one inherently more plausible? (Well, other than the fact that it actually is attested...)

First of all, such a change is more likely in word-final position than in prevocalic position, because consonants adjacent to a vowel are acoustically more salient than consonants not adjacent to a vowel. And secondly, part of the criticism in the other thread was because your sound change idea seemed not to take into account the differences between different types of consonants. Maybe thinking about such differences would be a good idea here too.

[Tropylium]

While we're discussing syncope: what could happen after V > Ø / _# in multisyllabic words? Oddly enough the Index Diachronica reports this change quite frequently, so it appears to be plausible, but I'm worried it could result in lots of weird consonant clusters at the end of words in cases like e.g. atɣe > atɣ. Currently I'm resolving this by vowel epenthesis of the new consonant cluster e.g. atɣ > atɨɣ; is this plausible?

I dont believe in that, no. With a sonorant like /r/ i can see that happening as in estonian .... Estonian might be your best model to follow, in fact. see which consonant clusters they allow and which ones they split up. and which ones (if any) do not drop following vowels at all.

In Estonian this only occurs for C+/r l/ clusters (and C+j clusters turn into /Ci/), but in Hungarian this occurs for most heterorganic consonant clusters. The so-called "syncope stems" hence also include plenty of level or falling-sonority consonant clusters, e.g.
from *rm: három : hárm(a)- 'three'
from *lm: álom : álm(o)- 'sleep'
from *ʎm: sólyom : sólym(o)- 'falcon'
from *jm: majom : majm(o)- 'monkey'
from *rg: féreg : férg(e)- 'worm'
from *lg: dolog : dolg(o)- 'thing'
from *rk: farok : fark(a)- 'tail'
from *lk: gyilok : gyilk(o)- 'dagger'
from *ʎk: kölyök : kölyk(ö)- 'brat'
from *sk: fészek : fészk(e)- 'nest'
from *tsk: pocok : pock(o)- 'vole'
from *tʃk: mocsok : mocsk(o)- 'dirt'
from *tk: átok : átk(o)- 'curse'
from *ck: szutyok : szutyk(o)- 'dirt'

All homorganic consonant clusters such as /mp nd rt ls/ however remain intact (including also /nk/ → [ŋk]). Alveolar/postalveolar/palatal consonants are treated as homorganic, so that clusters like /jt rtʃ lɟ/ also remain (sajt 'cheese', tekercs 'scroll', tölgy 'oak' etc.). Additionally, heterorganic clusters ending in /v/ also remain (könyv 'book', nedv 'fluid', nyelv 'tongue', etc.) A few clusters are inconsistent: *rɲ is subject to epenthesis in torony : torny(o)- 'tower', but in several other words like szárny 'wing' it is not. Recent loanwords like film and farm are additionally not subject to this.

Khanty moreover has an entirely general (and probably related) rule of schwa epenthesis in heterorganic consonant clusters, with things like:
/kutʲŋ/ [kutʲəŋ] 'vicinity' : [kutʲŋ-ɯm] 'my vicinity'
/nowt/ [nowət] 'lifetime' : [nowt-ɑm] 'my lifetime'
/wæsɣ/ [wæsəɣ] 'duck' : [wisk-əm] 'my duck' (with *-sɣ- > /-sk-/).

An even wilder option is Northern Mansi, where schwa epenthesis is general but optional, and this ends up with realizations like /atp/ → [atəp] ~ [at.p̩]: basically any consonant can be phonetically syllabic, including the voiceless stops.

---

Overall: depending on your general phonotactics, I think even quite widespread vowel epenthesis is plausible. For clusters of very similar or identical consonants though, retention or assimilation would be maybe more likely, e.g. so that *-nme becomes /-nɨm/, but *-mme either remains /-mm/ or simplifies to /-m/. (Of course, if this *-me is a suffix, then analogy could also easily start introducing even forms like /-m-ɨm/ somewhere down the line.)

[bradrn]

In Estonian this only occurs for C+/r l/ clusters (and C+j clusters turn into /Ci/), but in Hungarian this occurs for most heterorganic consonant clusters. The so-called "syncope stems" hence also include plenty of level or falling-sonority consonant clusters, e.g.
from *rm: három : hárm(a)- 'three'
from *lm: álom : álm(o)- 'sleep'
from *ʎm: sólyom : sólym(o)- 'falcon'
from *jm: majom : majm(o)- 'monkey'
from *rg: féreg : férg(e)- 'worm'
from *lg: dolog : dolg(o)- 'thing'
from *rk: farok : fark(a)- 'tail'
from *lk: gyilok : gyilk(o)- 'dagger'
from *ʎk: kölyök : kölyk(ö)- 'brat'
from *sk: fészek : fészk(e)- 'nest'
from *tsk: pocok : pock(o)- 'vole'
from *tʃk: mocsok : mocsk(o)- 'dirt'
from *tk: átok : átk(o)- 'curse'
from *ck: szutyok : szutyk(o)- 'dirt'
All homorganic consonant clusters such as /mp nd rt ls/ however remain intact (including also /nk/ → [ŋk]). Alveolar/postalveolar/palatal consonants are treated as homorganic, so that clusters like /jt rtʃ lɟ/ also remain (sajt 'cheese', tekercs 'scroll', tölgy 'oak' etc.). Additionally, heterorganic clusters ending in /v/ also remain (könyv 'book', nedv 'fluid', nyelv 'tongue', etc.) A few clusters are inconsistent: *rɲ is subject to epenthesis in torony : torny(o)- 'tower', but in several other words like szárny 'wing' it is not. Recent loanwords like film and farm are additionally not subject to this.

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding these examples. Did the words on the left change to the words on the right, or did the words on the right change to the words on the left, or is it something else entirely?

Khanty moreover has an entirely general (and probably related) rule of schwa epenthesis in heterorganic consonant clusters, with things like:
/kutʲŋ/ [kutʲəŋ] 'vicinity' : [kutʲŋ-ɯm] 'my vicinity'
/nowt/ [nowət] 'lifetime' : [nowt-ɑm] 'my lifetime'
/wæsɣ/ [wæsəɣ] 'duck' : [wisk-əm] 'my duck' (with *-sɣ- > /-sk-/).

Is this the same process as happened in Hungarian, or a different one? Also from a Khanty grammar I found this appears to be a synchronic rather than a diachronic process (not that the difference matters too much).

An even wilder option is Northern Mansi, where schwa epenthesis is general but optional, and this ends up with realizations like /atp/ → [atəp] ~ [at.p̩]: basically any consonant can be phonetically syllabic, including the voiceless stops.

Now this is just weird. I thought that arbitrary syllabic consonants only occurred in northwest North America!

Overall: depending on your general phonotactics, I think even quite widespread vowel epenthesis is plausible. For clusters of very similar or identical consonants though, retention or assimilation would be maybe more likely, e.g. so that *-nme becomes /-nɨm/, but *-mme either remains /-mm/ or simplifies to /-m/. (Of course, if this *-me is a suffix, then analogy could also easily start introducing even forms like /-m-ɨm/ somewhere down the line.)

That seems reasonable. I think I'll have to think about the various options some more before I make a decision though.

[Tropylium]

In Estonian this only occurs for C+/r l/ clusters (and C+j clusters turn into /Ci/), but in Hungarian this occurs for most heterorganic consonant clusters. The so-called "syncope stems" hence also include plenty of level or falling-sonority consonant clusters, e.g.
from *rm: három : hárm(a)- 'three'
from *lm: álom : álm(o)- 'sleep'
from *ʎm: sólyom : sólym(o)- 'falcon'
from *jm: majom : majm(o)- 'monkey'
from *rg: féreg : férg(e)- 'worm'
from *lg: dolog : dolg(o)- 'thing'
from *rk: farok : fark(a)- 'tail'
from *lk: gyilok : gyilk(o)- 'dagger'
from *ʎk: kölyök : kölyk(ö)- 'brat'
from *sk: fészek : fészk(e)- 'nest'
from *tsk: pocok : pock(o)- 'vole'
from *tʃk: mocsok : mocsk(o)- 'dirt'
from *tk: átok : átk(o)- 'curse'
from *ck: szutyok : szutyk(o)- 'dirt'
All homorganic consonant clusters such as /mp nd rt ls/ however remain intact (including also /nk/ → [ŋk]). Alveolar/postalveolar/palatal consonants are treated as homorganic, so that clusters like /jt rtʃ lɟ/ also remain (sajt 'cheese', tekercs 'scroll', tölgy 'oak' etc.). Additionally, heterorganic clusters ending in /v/ also remain (könyv 'book', nedv 'fluid', nyelv 'tongue', etc.) A few clusters are inconsistent: *rɲ is subject to epenthesis in torony : torny(o)- 'tower', but in several other words like szárny 'wing' it is not. Recent loanwords like film and farm are additionally not subject to this.

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding these examples. Did the words on the left change to the words on the right, or did the words on the right change to the words on the left, or is it something else entirely?

The third: they're words that show synchronic alternation between -CEC in the nominative singular (where //E// is harmonic /e ~ ø ~ o/), -CC- in inflected forms.

Khanty moreover has an entirely general (and probably related) rule of schwa epenthesis in heterorganic consonant clusters, with things like:
/kutʲŋ/ [kutʲəŋ] 'vicinity' : [kutʲŋ-ɯm] 'my vicinity'
/nowt/ [nowət] 'lifetime' : [nowt-ɑm] 'my lifetime'
/wæsɣ/ [wæsəɣ] 'duck' : [wisk-əm] 'my duck' (with *-sɣ- > /-sk-/).

Is this the same process as happened in Hungarian, or a different one?

Different insofar as it happens separately from Hungarian, though they seem to be based on the same premises.

[bradrn]

In Estonian this only occurs for C+/r l/ clusters (and C+j clusters turn into /Ci/), but in Hungarian this occurs for most heterorganic consonant clusters. The so-called "syncope stems" hence also include plenty of level or falling-sonority consonant clusters, e.g.
from *rm: három : hárm(a)- 'three'
from *lm: álom : álm(o)- 'sleep'
from *ʎm: sólyom : sólym(o)- 'falcon'
from *jm: majom : majm(o)- 'monkey'
from *rg: féreg : férg(e)- 'worm'
from *lg: dolog : dolg(o)- 'thing'
from *rk: farok : fark(a)- 'tail'
from *lk: gyilok : gyilk(o)- 'dagger'
from *ʎk: kölyök : kölyk(ö)- 'brat'
from *sk: fészek : fészk(e)- 'nest'
from *tsk: pocok : pock(o)- 'vole'
from *tʃk: mocsok : mocsk(o)- 'dirt'
from *tk: átok : átk(o)- 'curse'
from *ck: szutyok : szutyk(o)- 'dirt'
All homorganic consonant clusters such as /mp nd rt ls/ however remain intact (including also /nk/ → [ŋk]). Alveolar/postalveolar/palatal consonants are treated as homorganic, so that clusters like /jt rtʃ lɟ/ also remain (sajt 'cheese', tekercs 'scroll', tölgy 'oak' etc.). Additionally, heterorganic clusters ending in /v/ also remain (könyv 'book', nedv 'fluid', nyelv 'tongue', etc.) A few clusters are inconsistent: *rɲ is subject to epenthesis in torony : torny(o)- 'tower', but in several other words like szárny 'wing' it is not. Recent loanwords like film and farm are additionally not subject to this.

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding these examples. Did the words on the left change to the words on the right, or did the words on the right change to the words on the left, or is it something else entirely?

The third: they're words that show synchronic alternation between -CEC in the nominative singular (where //E// is harmonic /e ~ ø ~ o/), -CC- in inflected forms.

That makes sense. So to confirm I'm understanding correctly: what's happening here is that e.g. *hárm > három, but *harmo- > no change.

[Tropylium]

So to confirm I'm understanding correctly: what's happening here is that e.g. *hárm > három, but *harmo- > no change.

Correct, yes.

[Ahzoh]

So, this is more grammatical than sound change, but I have the following sound changes that lead these ablaut patterns:

Code: Select all

Passive Singular:
tærukæ   > tærokæ   > tærok  <tärok>
tæru:kæ  > tæro:kæ  > tæro:k <tärōk>
tærokæ   > tærɒkæ   > tærɒk  <tärak>
tæro:kæ  > tærɒ:kæ  > tærɒ:k <tärāk>
tærɒkæ   > tærɒkæ   > tærɒk  <tärak>
tærɒ:kæ  > tærɒ:kæ  > tærɒ:k <tärāk>
tærikæ   > tærekæ   > tærek  <tärek>
tæri:kæ  > tære:kæ  > tære:k <tärēk>
tærekæ   > tærækæ   > tæræk  <täräk>
tære:kæ  > tæræ:kæ  > tæræ:k <tärǟk>
tærækæ   > tærækæ   > tæræk  <täräk>
tæræ:kæ  > tæræ:kæ  > tæræ:k <tärǟk>

Active Singular:
tæruku:  > tæruku:  > tæruk  <täruk>
tæru:ku: > tæru:ku: > tæru:k <tärūk>
tæroku:  > tæruku:  > tæruk  <täruk>
tæro:ku: > tæru:ku: > tæru:k <tärūk>
tærɒku:  > tæroku:  > tærok  <tärok>
tærɒ:ku: > tæro:ku: > tæro:k <tärōk>
tæriku:  > tæruku:  > tæruk  <täruk>
tæri:ku: > tæru:ku: > tæru:k <tärūk>
tæreku:  > tæroku:  > tærok  <tärok>
tære:ku: > tæro:ku: > tæro:k <tärōk>
tæræku:  > tæroku:  > tærok  <tärok>
tæræ:ku: > tæro:ku: > tæro:k <tärōk>

Passive Pluractional/Plural:
tærukæm   > tærokæm   > tærokæm  <tärokäm>
tæru:kæm  > tæro:kæm  > tæro:kæm <tärōkäm>
tærokæm   > tærɒkæm   > tærɒkæm  <tärakäm>
tæro:kæm  > tærɒ:kæm  > tærɒ:kæm <tärākäm>
tærɒkæm   > tærɒkæm   > tærɒkæm  <tärakäm>
tærɒ:kæm  > tærɒ:kæm  > tærɒ:kæm <tärākäm>
tærikæm   > tærekæm   > tærekæm  <tärekäm>
tæri:kæm  > tære:kæm  > tære:kæm <tärēkäm>
tærekæm   > tærækæm   > tærækæm  <täräkäm>
tære:kæm  > tæræ:kæm  > tæræ:kæm <tärǟkäm>
tærækæm   > tærækæm   > tærækæm  <täräkäm>
tæræ:kæm  > tæræ:kæm  > tæræ:kæm <tärǟkäm>

Active Pluractional/Plural:
tæruku:m  > tæruku:m  > tæruku:m  <tärukūm>
tæru:ku:m > tæru:ku:m > tæru:ku:m <tärūkūm>
tæroku:m  > tæruku:m  > tæruku:m  <tärukūm>
tæro:ku:m > tæru:ku:m > tæru:ku:m <tärūkūm>
tærɒku:m  > tæroku:m  > tæroku:m  <tärokūm>
tærɒ:ku:m > tæro:ku:m > tæro:ku:m <tärōkūm>
tæriku:m  > tæruku:m  > tæruku:m  <tärukūm>
tæri:ku:m > tæru:ku:m > tæru:ku:m <tärūkūm>
tæreku:m  > tæroku:m  > tæroku:m  <tärokūm>
tære:ku:m > tæro:ku:m > tæro:ku:m <tärōkūm>
tæræku:m  > tæroku:m  > tæroku:m  <tärokūm>
tæræ:ku:m > tæro:ku:m > tæro:ku:m <tärōkūm>

Now, given all these changes, what can be done so that only CVCaC/CVCCam (passive voice) and CVCuC/CVCCum (active voice) verb patterns result?

In addition, how would I have it so that the agent and patient noun forms are CuCC- and CiCC-, respectively? They are basically zero-derived from the verbs with the noun gender suffixes tacked on.

[bradrn]

Now, given all these changes, what can be done so that only CVCaC/CVCCam (passive voice) and CVCuC/CVCCum (active voice) verb patterns result?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. Are you saying that you want all of, say, /tærok/, /tærɒːk/, /tɑrek/ to go to /tærak/, with similar changes for all other verbs (i.e. not just tär-k)? Or am I misunderstanding?

In addition, how would I have it so that the agent and patient noun forms are CuCC- and CiCC-, respectively? They are basically zero-derived from the verbs with the noun gender suffixes tacked on.

What exactly are the noun gender suffixes? Knowing them might make this easier to answer.

[Ahzoh]

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. Are you saying that you want all of, say, /tærok/, /tærɒːk/, /tɑrek/ to go to /tærak/, with similar changes for all other verbs (i.e. not just tär-k)? Or am I misunderstanding?

Basically, yes. It's the beginning of a triconsonantal root system. That means I need to morphologically level the ablaut patterns and I want them to be leveled to CVCaC for passive voice and CVCuC for active voice. I suppose I could probably just hand-wave the active voice pattern into having the CVCuC pattern since most of them are statistically close to that pattern, but I'm not as sure about the pattern CVCaC for passive voice.

What exactly are the noun gender suffixes? Knowing them might make this easier to answer.

Just -e (masculine) and -a (feminine), they're rather inherent to the language's nouns like Spanish -o/-a are inherent to Spanish nouns. So they're kind of inert as far as grammatically-induced sound changes (like vowel mutation) are concerned.