|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
 Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 10:40 am
Okay. Now we've got our phoneme inventory worked out; we need phonotactics rules before we can move on.
I vote we can write nasals before -all- unvoiced plosives and only voiced ones in the same range-thingy (the word escapes me).
So one could write, say, and (I really like the latter combination), but when using voiced plosives we could only write , and .
You people come up with random phonotactic rules and then we'll work out which ones we'll keep and which ones we'll get rid of. surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 8:55 pm
Phonotactics is a bit out of my linquistic reach, I think, but if nothing else I can use this thread to get myself adjusted. I usually just specify a few combinations that are forbidden in any word, and say that pretty much anything else is OK. sweatdrop So far we have... Acceptable: Nasal followed by Unvoiced Plosives - ... ALL
Nasal followed by Voiced Plosives - ONLY
Hmm.
I think we could do with plosives followed by fricatives, such as or or . They should match voiced or unvoiced, too, so no or , etc.
Another rule... and can come before or after any consonant, voiced or unvoiced, except at the beginning of a word where or may only precede a vowel (or follow a consonant). Thus would be acceptable anywhere in a word, but would only be acceptable if not starting a word. The same for
/ or / or any other.
Am I doing it right? surprised
It seems to make sense so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 9:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 3:35 pm
Lemme get this straight, though... These rules will only apply to phoneme combinations within a syllable, right? So if there are two syllables, the last phoneme of the first syllable, and the first phoneme of the second syllable don't necessarily have to adhere to these rules?
For example, with our current rules, kamga would be an acceptable word?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 4:05 pm
Within a morpheme, methinks. We could also use a vowel to separate impossible phoneme combinations. surprised
So "kamaga" could be a word, maybe. But "kamga" would work too, perhaps; if the two things were different morphemes agglutinating with each other. mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 9:22 am
Ah, ok. The whole morpheme business is still a bit strange to me, as well. sweatdrop
Another suggestion:
No fricatives in front of plosives, except...
I'm not sure about and .
These are getting weird, but I like it. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 12:37 pm
That looks good to me, except I like and . 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 5:13 pm
Ok, so far we have...
Nasal followed by Unvoiced Plosives - ... ALL
Nasal followed by Voiced Plosives - ONLY
Approximants precede or follow any consonant except at the beginning of a word/morpheme - ... ETC
No fricatives in front of plosives, except -
,
,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 6:46 pm
Should we make any special rules for word beginnings? surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 5:03 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eccentric Iconoclast Captain
|
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:13 am
I want at the end of words, but other than that it sounds good. surprised
I was thinking that the only word-initial plosives would be unvoiced. surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:06 pm
^That all sounds good to me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:08 pm
I love the German "schl" as in "Schlange", but I'm not really all that good with phonotactics, so please put that wherever you see fit... or not, if you don't like it....I don't know. This kind of thing confuses me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
