Zompist Bboard Again

Nortaneous wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:57 pm

EastOfEden wrote: ↑Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:44 pm This is a spectacularly late reply, but I was reading through old posts and wanted to say that /ɚ/ does seem to cause l-breaking in my speech (pretty close to GenAm), just less obviously and less dramatically than closing diphthongs and high tense vowels. "girl" is something like [kɚᵊɫ], maybe, with a very small schwa in there.

For me, words like "ale", "eel", "aisle", and "oil" are clearly disyllabic, and sometime in grade school, I realized I pronounced "Carl" as a disyllable, and figured this couldn't be correct because it was spelled with one syllable. (I think I only noticed after I got Fire Emblem 7, which has a character named Karel.)

Is "girl" disyllabic for you?

In some cases, though, it's not clear whether a word is monosyllabic or disyllabic. Around here, that's the case for MOUTH + l. At one point I asked my mom (who takes some interest in US dialects) how many syllables were in some list of words (with unrelated ones as controls so it wasn't obvious what I was looking for), and those were the words she wasn't sure about.

I think I generally have monosyllables for such words, but disyllables in "owl" and "vowel", and "towel" can have either. Does anyone have a contrast between /æwl/ <owl>/<oul> and /æwəl/ <owel>? That is, are there people for whom "owl", "howl", "foul", "scowl" etc. are consistently monosyllabic, and "bowel", "towel", "trowel", "vowel" etc. are consistently disyllabic?

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 6:49 pm When pronouncing it in isolation, "eel" tends to be a disyllable [iːjəɫ], but in more rapid speech, I think it's [iːɫ]; same with "ail/ale" [eijəɫ] in isolation, but often [ejɫ]] in rapid speech; "oil" and "aisle/I'll/isle" are definitely always disyllabic [ɔɪjəɫ] and [aijəɫ], respectively; "girl" is a monosyllable [gɚɫ], but "Carl" is [kɑɹəɫ], the Fire Emblem character "Karel", I used to say [kə'ɹɛɫ] or [kɛɹəɫ] (I was never sure which was intended, but the former became more common after I'd studied some French; the Katakana spelling also points to it, I think). All of the [auwɚ] ones are also at least disyllabic except in some poetry.

Nortaneous wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 7:44 pm

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 6:49 pm When pronouncing it in isolation, "eel" tends to be a disyllable [iːjəɫ], but in more rapid speech, I think it's [iːɫ]; same with "ail/ale" [eijəɫ] in isolation, but often [ejɫ]] in rapid speech; "oil" and "aisle/I'll/isle" are definitely always disyllabic [ɔɪjəɫ] and [aijəɫ], respectively; "girl" is a monosyllable [gɚɫ], but "Carl" is [kɑɹəɫ], the Fire Emblem character "Karel", I used to say [kə'ɹɛɫ] or [kɛɹəɫ] (I was never sure which was intended, but the former became more common after I'd studied some French; the Katakana spelling also points to it, I think). All of the [auwɚ] ones are also at least disyllabic except in some poetry.

"I'll" is homophonous with "aisle" instead of "all"?

Ahzoh wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:14 pm I have tried and failed to find an old post on the CBB or ZBB regarding one of my conlangs using word-initial gemination to indicate plurality.

So, how would I go about having word-initial gemination to indicate plurality again?

Ahzoh wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:14 pm I have tried and failed to find an old post on the CBB or ZBB regarding one of my conlangs using word-initial gemination to indicate plurality.

So, how would I go about having word-initial gemination to indicate plurality again?

Nortaneous wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:33 pm if you want data on initial gemination it's best known from micronesian, italian dialects, and maltese

Maspero (1976:17) wrote: Di teqbaylit ggwten imesla : dagi 44.
Tutlayin nniḍen n tmaziɣt ur ssawḍent ar’ annecta. Amedya di tfinaɣ, 26 isekkilen kan ay gellan.
Maca llan imesla ineṣliyen, llan wiyad d ijentaḍ …

— Akafu nnig usekkil (slid : č, ǧ), neɣ ticcewt ddaw-as (ţ, z̧) sskanen tizgenaggaɣin.
— Maa teɣli teɣri zdat tayeḍ ţţarran ticcert ggwemkan is : w’ara yeswen (= wi ara yeswen).

Ahzoh wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:10 pm Now I think of it, I might apsirate initial-geminate stops. I mean I know of languages with such initial geminates, but I'm not sure how stable that is phonetically.

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:42 pm I’d say the most straightforward approach would be to reduplicate the initial syllable, then somehow delete the reduplicated vowel.

Nortaneous wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 10:22 pm

Ahzoh wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:10 pm Now I think of it, I might apsirate initial-geminate stops. I mean I know of languages with such initial geminates, but I'm not sure how stable that is phonetically.

for whatever reason they're stable in the mediterranean, but highly unstable in micronesian:
- marshallese has two major dialect groups. in one, #Cː > yeCC; in the other, #Cː > CeC
- pohnpeian has #Cː > NC > VNC (with a high vowel unlike in micronesian)
- woleaian massively restructured the consonant system, developing a length-and-quality system vaguely similar to west germanic vowels. *ʃː *rː merge as tʃː, the short forms of pʷː kː are ɸʷ x, etc
- mokilese and pingelapese had #Cː > NC like pohnpeian; pingelapese then vocalized the nasal element completely
- chuukese preserves initial geminates

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:42 pm I’d say the most straightforward approach would be to reduplicate the initial syllable, then somehow delete the reduplicated vowel.

this is what happened in western micronesian. the rule can just be that vowels drop between like consonants - see here and probably here

dɮ the phoneme wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 4:04 pm I think I asked about this once on the old board, but does any language have unconditional f > p?

dɮ the phoneme wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 4:04 pm I think I asked about this once on the old board, but does any language have unconditional f > p?