Sound Change Quickie Thread

[Knit Tie]

I'm just trying to fiddle around with a language that is primarily voiced, as opposed to voiceless.

Perhaps go through with the usual consonant chain shift from my family (spirant < voiceless < voiced < prenasalised voiced) and then do a lot of initial and final voicing before the agglutination becomes prominent?

[Travis B.]

(Going back a few pages) in my (native) English initial interdentals very frequently turn into dental stops unless preceded by vowels, by nasals, or by sibilants (where then they are preserved, turn into dental nasal stops, or assimilate respectively). Also, nasals are frequently lost between vowels and following fortis stops (except in the case of /nt/, which normally either becomes a nasal flap or is lost altogether), turning into vowel nasalization. As for /nd/, it very frequently becomes [n], and /dn/ and /dVn/ very frequently become [nː]; likewise /bm and /bVm/ very frequently become [mː] - note that for /dn/, /dVn/, /bm/ and /bVm/ the preceding vowel is not nasalized. As for laterals, there is essentially universal l-vocalization except that it is optional word-initially and at the start of stressed syllables, particularly in careful speech (where then it is [ʟ̞]); otherwise it becomes one of [ɤ̯ ɰ o̯ w] depending on what it is adjacent to (both with regard to rounding and height) and what position it is in (whether it is in an onset, intervocalic, or in a coda). Also, one thing I have been noticing is occasional mergers of initial fortis and lenis plosives, where people will essentially forget to aspirate initial fortis plosives.

[Xwtek]

and then voicing the lenis for an overabundance of voiced consonants

what would trigger this tho?

Assuming the lenis stop comes from English voiced stops, it's possible that they're not voiceless to begin with. In RP, voiced consonant is partially/optionally devoiced both word initially and word finally.

https://notendur.hi.is/peturk/KENNSLA/0 ... rtlen.html

Scratch that. I thought only the lenis consonant that is neither word-initial or word-final that is voiced.

[Knit Tie]

(Going back a few pages) in my (native) English initial interdentals very frequently turn into dental stops unless preceded by vowels, by nasals, or by sibilants (where then they are preserved, turn into dental nasal stops, or assimilate respectively). Also, nasals are frequently lost between vowels and following fortis stops (except in the case of /nt/, which normally either becomes a nasal flap or is lost altogether), turning into vowel nasalization. As for /nd/, it very frequently becomes [n], and /dn/ and /dVn/ very frequently become [nː]; likewise /bm and /bVm/ very frequently become [mː] - note that for /dn/, /dVn/, /bm/ and /bVm/ the preceding vowel is not nasalized. As for laterals, there is essentially universal l-vocalization except that it is optional word-initially and at the start of stressed syllables, particularly in careful speech (where then it is [ʟ̞]); otherwise it becomes one of [ɤ̯ ɰ o̯ w] depending on what it is adjacent to (both with regard to rounding and height) and what position it is in (whether it is in an onset, intervocalic, or in a coda). Also, one thing I have been noticing is occasional mergers of initial fortis and lenis plosives, where people will essentially forget to aspirate initial fortis plosives.

That way of handling the dentals sounds pretty freaking amazing. Mind if I ask you what your English is and then steal it?

[Travis B.]

That way of handling the dentals sounds pretty freaking amazing. Mind if I ask you what your English is and then steal it?

I am from southeastern Wisconsin and speak an Inland North dialect. My dialect probably isn't as strange as it sounds, but rather other dialects are stranger than people who speak them realize. (I have gotten reactions ranging from that my speech sounds awfully normal to that I have a pretty strong accent, depending on where the commenters themselves are from.)

And yes, feel free to steal any of the above.

[bradrn]

In sound changes, does /w/ usually pattern as a labial or a velar? (Or can it pattern as either?)

[Xwtek]

In sound changes, does /w/ usually pattern as a labial or a velar? (Or can it pattern as either?)

Searching for sound change involving /w/, I get that for fortition:

1. In Lycian, /w/ > /b/after consonant
2. In Vandalig, /wː/ > /g/

Also, according to this: http://www.linguistics.berkeley.edu/~oh ... y_of_w.pdf, /w/ also comes from both sources.

[Knit Tie]

That way of handling the dentals sounds pretty freaking amazing. Mind if I ask you what your English is and then steal it?

I am from southeastern Wisconsin and speak an Inland North dialect. My dialect probably isn't as strange as it sounds, but rather other dialects are stranger than people who speak them realize. (I have gotten reactions ranging from that my speech sounds awfully normal to that I have a pretty strong accent, depending on where the commenters themselves are from.)

And yes, feel free to steal any of the above.

So, I've been thinking on how to properly implement this in my conlang, and how about this:

1)Th-stopping everywhere, prenasalised interdentals become dental nasals

2)Nasals become vowel nasalisation when preceding another consonant, word-vinal nasals retained as VN sequences

3)Eventually, morphology puts different morphemes together and makes both nasalised vowels and VN sequences contrast word-internally and in checked syllables

4)Syllabic nasals become nasal vowels, the only ones allowed word-finally

5)Pervasive L-vocalisation to velar fricative, so much so that the consonant disappears from the phonology entirely before being reintroduced by loans

How's that sound?

[Travis B.]

How's that sound?

I personally wouldn't change /l/ to a fricative unless it was being devoiced. Aside from that, it seems reasonable, if not what is spoken in southeastern WI.

[Knit Tie]

How's that sound?

I personally wouldn't change /l/ to a fricative unless it was being devoiced. Aside from that, it seems reasonable, if not what is spoken in southeastern WI.

What would you change it to, then? Although /x~ɣ/ depending on position is fine, too.

[Travis B.]

How's that sound?

I personally wouldn't change /l/ to a fricative unless it was being devoiced. Aside from that, it seems reasonable, if not what is spoken in southeastern WI.

What would you change it to, then? Although /x~ɣ/ depending on position is fine, too.

Here it changes to a velar lateral approximant [ʟ̞] at the start of an initial or stressed syllable (optionally, otherwise it becomes one of [ɰ w]) or when germinate (obligately), [ɯ ʊ] depending on what it is adjacent to when syllabic, [ɰ w] depending on what it is adjacent to when following a consonant, and otherwise it becomes one of [ɯ̯ ʊ̯ ɤ̯ o̯] depending on what it is adjacent to.

[bradrn]

I personally wouldn't change /l/ to a fricative unless it was being devoiced. Aside from that, it seems reasonable, if not what is spoken in southeastern WI.

What would you change it to, then? Although /x~ɣ/ depending on position is fine, too.

Here it changes to a velar lateral approximant [ʟ̞] at the start of an initial or stressed syllable (optionally, otherwise it becomes one of [ɰ w]) or when germinate (obligately), [ɯ ʊ] depending on what it is adjacent to when syllabic, [ɰ w] depending on what it is adjacent to when following a consonant, and otherwise it becomes one of [ɯ̯ ʊ̯ ɤ̯ o̯] depending on what it is adjacent to.

I speak Australian English (I think), and have something similar. Here, /l/ → [ɫ] usually, but → [ʟ] in the coda. (It could be [ɰ] or [w] as well, I still haven’t figured out exactly what that sound is.)

[Travis B.]

I am currently in New Mexico (my previous references to here referred to southeastern Wisconsin), and I wonder if anyone was confused by my references to [ˈɰɘsə(ː)], i.e. my daughter.

[bradrn]

I am currently in New Mexico (my previous references to here referred to southeastern Wisconsin), and I wonder if anyone was confused by my references to [ˈɰɘsə(ː)], i.e. my daughter.

Which references would these be? I haven’t seen them.

Anyway, how does ‘my daughter’ become [ˈɰɘsə(ː)]?

[Pabappa]

Wow, that's the strangest baby name I've ever heard. Mustve had quite a trouble with teachers saying it wrong. Or maybe its just Lisa.

[Travis B.]

Anyway, how does ‘my daughter’ become [ˈɰɘsə(ː)]?

My daughter's name is Alyssa, who I normally call /ˈlɪsə/, which when not speaking carefully becomes [ˈɰɘsə(ː)]. (Lisa would be /ˈlisə/, i.e. [ˈɰisə(ː)].)

[bradrn]

Anyway, how does ‘my daughter’ become [ˈɰɘsə(ː)]?

My daughter's name is Alyssa, who I normally call /ˈlɪsə/, which when not speaking carefully becomes [ˈɰɘsə(ː)]. (Lisa would be /ˈlisə/, i.e. [ˈɰisə(ː)].)

That makes sense.

(Also, I noticed that the first syllable has [ɘ] but the second has [ə]. Was this intentional?)

[Travis B.]

(Also, I noticed that the first syllable has [ɘ] but the second has [ə]. Was this intentional?)

Yes - stressed /ɪ/ is uniformly [ɘ] in my dialect, while final unstressed /ə/ (with the weak vowel merger) is uniformly [ə].

[Knit Tie]

So if /ɫ/ cam become /ɰ/ pretty much everywhere, why not say that it becomes /ɣ/ later on throuɡh /ɫ/ → /ɰ/ → /ɣ/?

Also, I'm wondering if there's a dialect of English where both the rhotics and the labials are transitioning to something else - that could potentially make for a cool proto-language with no liquids.

[Travis B.]

So if /ɫ/ cam become /ɰ/ pretty much everywhere, why not say that it becomes /ɣ/ later on throuɡh /ɫ/ → /ɰ/ → /ɣ/?

That is a possibility, but I would limit it to the most stressed positions, i.e. initial consonants in stressed onsets and geminates.

Also, I'm wondering if there's a dialect of English where both the rhotics and the labials are transitioning to something else - that could potentially make for a cool proto-language with no liquids.

There are English English dialects where /r/ has become [ʋ].