Zompist Bboard Again

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:26 am (BTW, are you the same person formerly known as Akangka?)

Yes.

Xwtek wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:33 pm

Whimemsz wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:43 pm

Xwtek wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:20 am Weirdly, pharyngeal consonant tend to trigger advancement of the vowel, not retracting it.

What are some examples? This is certainly not the case in, say, Arabic or Chilcotin or Spokane, where pharyngeals/pharyngealized consonants result in vowel lowering, backing, and/or -ATR (or similar).

Actually, Arabic IS the example of this phenomenon (or at least Cairene Arabic). https://escholarship.org/content/qt50v3 ... f?t=nmp4q5. Note that pharyngealized consonants DO retract the vowel, but the pharyngeal consonants itself don't. For the more extreme example, Avar rounded back vowel is pronounced as rounded front vowel next to pharyngeal consonant: /goħ/ > [gøħ].

Ah, interesting, thanks!

So I have another variant of space future English that vocalizes all laterals, in all positions. Laterals in the onset become /ɣ/, and while I know what to do with them when they're alone - devoicing into /x/ - I don't know what to do with them in clusters aside from elision. Like, for example, the word 'black," which in the language's middle/pre-modern state is /bɛɣɛg/, and I dislike how it sounds. The obvious route for sound change is to simply labialize the fricative into /w/, but I also abhor the sound of Cw clusters unless the C is velar or an alveolar liquid. Perhaps insert another vowel there, for /bɛɣɛg/ > /bɛxɛg/?

Knit Tie wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:03 amThe obvious route for sound change is to simply labialize the fricative into /w/, but I also abhor the sound of Cw clusters unless the C is velar or an alveolar liquid.

pw > kw, with original kw chainshifting to qw?

is this realistic:

y > ø

Unconditionally. (While yː > iː)

Xwtek wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 2:16 am is this realistic:

y > ø

Unconditionally. (While yː > iː)

In Basque dialects with /y/ it's allegedly lowered, so sure

Vowel lowering is rarer than vowel raising, for whatever reason. However, I can think of two examples off the top of my head of high vowels lowering; neither of them are /y/, but they provide a sufficient justification for what you're trying to do:

- Romance/Modern Persian: short *ĭ *ŭ > /e o/, long *ī *ū > /i u/
- Menominee: Proto-Algonquian *i *ī > /ɪ ɪ:/ (written and sometimes pronounced <e e:>), new /i i:/ develop from *i(:) *e(:) following a postconsonantal glide, e.g. *kyē > kī

Easiest way I could see *y *y: > ø i occurring is a Romance-style quantity-to-quality conversion, perhaps in conjunction with *u *u: > o u and *i *i: > e i. /y/ then derounds, leaving /ø/ alone--though I've never seen this, there are a handful of languages (e.g. Hopi) that have /ø/ but not /y/.

A third example of vowel lowering is that many branches of Uralic (notably Saamic and Ugric) feature lowering of high vowels to mid or low as short counterparts to the lengthened low and mid vowels.

I'm certain I've asked this or something similar on some board. But it always seems I will research something for a while on my own and not find what I need, and as soon as someone answers my question on a board even just to say they aren't sure, I find something relevant. So here's to hoping that holds.

Is there any evidence that vowel raising or lowering has any effect on tones? If so, what? If not, would there be any other interesting effects I could get from vowel lowering/raising?

Also I know lowering is less common than raising in general, but is it possible for lowering and raising to occur at about the same time (acting on different vowels), or would one happen to some vowels and then later the other?

linguistcat wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 11:39 amAlso I know lowering is less common than raising in general, but is it possible for lowering and raising to occur at about the same time (acting on different vowels), or would one happen to some vowels and then later the other?

Tuscarora had a shift where all its vowels moved counterclockwise (IIRC), which would have involved both raising and lowering.

Zaarin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 2:16 pm

linguistcat wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 11:39 amAlso I know lowering is less common than raising in general, but is it possible for lowering and raising to occur at about the same time (acting on different vowels), or would one happen to some vowels and then later the other?

Tuscarora had a shift where all its vowels moved counterclockwise (IIRC), which would have involved both raising and lowering.

Yeah rotational vowel shifts have happened a decent number of times. Some Mongolic languages have had the same thing, for instance. (EDIT: And several Scandinavian languages for that matter.)

I've heard that vowel shifts in Mandarin have sometimes been dependent on the tone of the vowel, but I'm not aware of the tone shifts being dependent on quality. i.e. there are no gaps in the inventory where /i/ has four tones but /y/ only has three, etc. Thus, i would expect a shift like /i u/ > /e o/ in a tonal language to leave the tones intact.

edit: reworded

Thanks. I don't think I remember seeing about rotational vowel shifts but they make sense as a type of chain shift. Good to know.

In the Tai languages, the tone of syllables ending in a plosive ('dead' syllables - Proto-Tai tone D) often depends on the (former) length of the vowel. As low vowels are typically long and mid vowels are typically short, the absence of contrastive vowel length can result in a strong correlation of vowel quality and tone. That's not really an example of vowel raising or lowering affecting tone.

Is x → ʃ plausible? If yes, does it require multiple steps (I’m thinking x → ç → ʃ) or can it be done in just one step?

well, if your phonology has no /ç/, it's not important to decide which path to take, but if you do have ç, even allophonically, then yes, its worth noting that it would likely also be bundled into the shift. i would say that the two-step path is more likely than a direct shift if it's unconditional.

bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:18 am Is x → ʃ plausible? If yes, does it require multiple steps (I’m thinking x → ç → ʃ) or can it be done in just one step?

The other direction is certainly more common, but if memory serves it happened in some North American languages.

Pabappa wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:47 am well, if your phonology has no /ç/, it's not important to decide which path to take, but if you do have ç, even allophonically, then yes, its worth noting that it would likely also be bundled into the shift. i would say that the two-step path is more likely than a direct shift if it's unconditional.

I don’t have /ç/, so there isn’t any possibility of interference.

I've just noticed that Hall, The Phonology of Coronals, 77, calls x → ʃ / _i, e common, fwiw.

akam chinjir wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 11:46 pm I've just noticed that Hall, The Phonology of Coronals, 77, calls x → ʃ / _i, e common, fwiw.

Thank you! But does it say anything about that change happening unconditionally?