Random phonology/phonemic inventory thread [2011–2018]

[Nachtuil]

Do you prefer /a e i o u/, or /a ɛ i ɔ u/? I don't have much of a preference either way, so for now, there is free variance between /e/and /ɛ/ and between /o/ and /ɔ/.

I tend to prefer a ɛ i ɔ u though mostly because I disfavour poor o.

[Parlox]

An idea i had (Not sure it works)

/mʷ n/
/kʷ k g͡b d b k͡p bʷ/
/ts t͡ʃ t͡ʃʷ d͡ʒ/
/s z/
/ɸ v θ h/
/ɾ/
/w wʷ/

/i ɯ u/
/o/
/ɛ œ ɔ/
/a ã/

[Frislander]

An idea i had (Not sure it works)

/mʷ n/
/kʷ k g͡b d b k͡p bʷ/
/ts t͡ʃ t͡ʃʷ d͡ʒ/
/s z/
/ɸ v θ h/
/ɾ/
/w wʷ/

/i ɯ u/
/o/
/ɛ œ ɔ/
/a ã/

OK, so the presence of /mʷ/ without plain /m/ is definitely unattested in natlangs. The stop system seems OK to me, as does the affricate system. With the fricatives, the labial fricatives are wildly asymmetric: you'd quickly get either /ɸ/>/f/ or /v/>/β/ to even it out. And /w/ and /wʷ/ are identical.

The vowels are also rather weirdly asymmetric (why /o/ without /e/ and /ø/? Why close back-unrounded /ɯ/ and open-mid front-rounded /œ/ without open-mid back-unrounded /ʌ/ and close front-rounded /y/?) but if you have the historical development to support it you could get away with it. I'd still expect moves to rebalance the system fairly quickly though.

[Parlox]

The second version of my phomene inventory

/mʷ n/
/kʷ k g͡b d b k͡p bʷ dʷ/
/ts t͡ʃ t͡ʃʷ d͡ʒ/
/s z ʃ/
/f v θ h ɹ/
/ɾ/
/w wʷ/

/ɯ u/
/o e ø/
/ɛ œ ɔ ʌ/
/a ã/

[DV82LECM]

But what the fresh hell is [wʷ]? A more compressed W?

[qwed117]

The second version of my phomene inventory

/mʷ n/
/kʷ k g͡b d b k͡p bʷ dʷ/
/ts t͡ʃ t͡ʃʷ d͡ʒ/
/s z ʃ/
/f v θ h ɹ/
/ɾ/
/w wʷ/

/ɯ u/
/o e ø/
/ɛ œ ɔ ʌ/
/a ã/

Just a devil's advocate: Keep mw, just describe it as the predominant pronunciation of m. German has sw, but everyone denotes it as s.

[Frislander]

The second version of my phomene inventory

/mʷ n/
/kʷ k g͡b d b k͡p bʷ dʷ/
/ts t͡ʃ t͡ʃʷ d͡ʒ/
/s z ʃ/
/f v θ h ɹ/
/ɾ/
/w wʷ/

/ɯ u/
/o e ø/
/ɛ œ ɔ ʌ/
/a ã/

Just a devil's advocate: Keep mw, just describe it as the predominant pronunciation of m. German has sw, but everyone denotes it as s.

Yeah, I'll let that one slide: having certain consonants present only as part of certain coarticulations is very much attested.

I will also reecho DV82LECM and ask what on earth /wʷ/ is supposed to be.

Looking at the vowels again there are still odd gaps, the lack of /i/ in particular being most jarring.

[Parlox]

I don't round my w's very much, wʷ is just more rounded then w, in some dialects wʷ is replaced with ordinary w.
The vowel inventory is not done, i am still trying to find out what works best.

[Frislander]

I don't round my w's very much, wʷ is just more rounded then w, in some dialects wʷ is replaced with ordinary w.
The vowel inventory is not done, i am still trying to find out what works best.

Well if you don't round /w/ very much then you might want to use something like /ɰ w/ to represent your sounds instead, which is an OK pair to have.

[Creyeditor]

Why should they, if /w/ is labial and /wʷ/ is labial and rounded?

[Frislander]

Why should they, if /w/ is labial and /wʷ/ is labial and rounded?

Well then that's more /β w/ then.

[opipik]

t k ʔ n s w j ɾ <t k ' n s w y r>
i o a ə e <i u~o a ɨ e>
o is spelled u in open syllables, o in closed syllables
i is pronounced [ɪ] in closed syllables
o is pronounced [ʊ] in open syllables
e is pronounced [ɛ] in closed syllables
Non-glottal stops are aspirated word-finally

[Creyeditor]

Why should they, if /w/ is labial and /wʷ/ is labial and rounded?

Well then that's more /β w/ then.

And if both of them are (also) velar?
I mean, I would understand if someone suggested / w̹ / vs. / w̜ / or maybe some lip compression diacritic, but suggesting a non-velar labial or a non-labial velar does not really make sense to me.

[DesEsseintes]

Why should they, if /w/ is labial and /wʷ/ is labial and rounded?

Well then that's more /β w/ then.

And if both of them are (also) velar?
I mean, I would understand if someone suggested / w̹ / vs. / w̜ / or maybe some lip compression diacritic, but suggesting a non-velar labial or a non-labial velar does not really make sense to me.

Note also that rounding might be a feature that spreads to adjacent phonemes. I have a conlang which distinguishes /w ʷw/ as one of them causes rounding of preceding vowels and the other one doesn't.

The possibilities go beyond the IPA chart.

[Frislander]

Why should they, if /w/ is labial and /wʷ/ is labial and rounded?

Well then that's more /β w/ then.

And if both of them are (also) velar?
I mean, I would understand if someone suggested / w̹ / vs. / w̜ / or maybe some lip compression diacritic, but suggesting a non-velar labial or a non-labial velar does not really make sense to me.

Note also that rounding might be a feature that spreads to adjacent phonemes. I have a conlang which distinguishes /w ʷw/ as one of them causes rounding of preceding vowels and the other one doesn't.

The possibilities go beyond the IPA chart.

Well then, if you mean something like that the best thing to do would be to explain the difference.

So, Parlox, what differences are there between /w/ and /wʷ/?

[Frislander]

/b d~ɾ d͡ʒ~z g/
/m/
/w l~n j/

/d d͡ʒ/ are realised as [ɾ z] intervocalically. All obstruents are devoiced word-finally, and /d͡ʒ/ is realised as in this position. /m/ assimilates to a following obstruent when it's in the coda. For some speakers /l/ is realised as [n] word-initially and intervocalically.

In stressed syllables /i e a aɪ̯ u o ɒ ɒʊ̯/ are distinguished. In unstressed syllables only /ə ʊ/ are found.

Syllables structure is (C)V(C)(C), where acceptable codas exclude the glides, and coda clusters consist of /m l/ + obstruent.

Stress/accent is strongly word-final, with the penultimate syllable only having one of the two unstressed vowels and codas being restricted to /m l/.

[Man in Space]

Proto:

/m n ŋ/
/p pʰ b t tʰ d tʲ tʲʰ dʲ k kʰ g q qʰ ɢ ʔ/
/θ ð s z ʃ ʒ/
/l j/

/u o a e i/

(C)V(l/θ/s/ʃ/p/t/tʲ/k/q/ʔ)

Ghaazhgeen:

/m n ŋ/ m n ng
/p pʰ b t tʰ d~ɹ k kʰ g/ p ph b t th d~r k kh g
/tʃ tʃʰ/ č čh
/θ ð s z ʃ ʒ x ɣ/ ț đ s z š ž k̦ ǥ
/l/ l

/u uː o oː ɔː a aː ə əː ɛː e eː i iː/ u uu o oo ɔɔ a aa ə əə ɛɛ e ee i ii (debating on ɔɔ ɛɛ vs. oa ea)
/i̯u~i̯o i̯uː i̯oː i̯a i̯aː i̯ə i̯əː i̯e i̯eː/ iu iuu ioo ia iaa iə iəə ie iee
/ui̯ oi̯ ai̯ əi̯ ei̯/ ui oi ai əi ei
/i̯ui̯ i̯oi̯ i̯ai̯ i̯əi̯ i̯ei̯/ iui ioi iai iəi iei
/ou̯ au̯ əu̯ eu̯/ ou au əu eu
/i̯ou̯ i̯au̯ i̯əu̯ i̯eu̯/ iou iau iəu ieu
/u̯o u̯oː/ uo uoo

(C)V(C) (thanks to a final vowel-deletion rule)

b d g → β ð ɣ / _{i̯,i(ː)} (not indicated in writing)

[LinguoFranco]

Which word do you like better as the first person pronoun? [to.βo] or [ug.ɔn]?

[Frislander]

/b d~ɾ d͡ʒ~z g/
/w l j ɰ/
/m/

The allophony follows the same rules as the similar phonology I posted above.

/i e y ø ɤ a u o ɑ/ are found in stressed syllables, while unstressed syllables only distinguish /ə ʊ/.

In stressed syllables the following tones are found: /˩ ˥ ˥˩ ˧˥ ˨˩˧/. There is not tonal contrast in unstressed syllables.

Syllable structure is (C)CV(C), where acceptable codas are limited to /l m/ and acceptable clusters consist of an obstruent plus /l/. The stressed syllable is universally word-final, with the penultimate syllable being a minor syllable with no onset clusters permitted.

Which word do you like better as the first person pronoun? [to.βo] or [ug.ɔn]?

The Random Phonology thread is not the place to put this, but I'd say the latter.

[alynnidalar]

Which word do you like better as the first person pronoun? [to.βo] or [ug.ɔn]?

I like [to.βo]!