[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [ceqli] phonemes



on 2/14/04 3:24 PM, HandyDad at lsulky@hidden.email wrote:

> I've been thinking about Ceqli's phoneme set, and the challenges it
> might pose to speakers of Mandarin, Japanese, Indonesian, Hindi, etc.
> Some of these languages don't have a voiced/unvoiced distinction,
> though if they don't they usually have an unaspirated/aspirated
> distinction. Also, a lot of the Asian languages only have one liquid,
> more often "l" than "r". Could this pose a serious problem?
> 
> I know Latenkwa/Nasendi/Katanda also has a big phoneme set (though
> just one native liquid). What have other conlangers concluded about
> voiced/unvoiced - unaspirated/aspirated, etc.?
> 
I would say no.  We've got it down to the Five Classical Vowels, and, for
example, there are no sounds in Ceqli that aren't present in Hindi or
English, and, I _think_, Mandarin.  We have some consonant clusters that you
won't find in M or H,  but I don't think they're a problem.  As it looks to
me, we have a language so far easier to pronounce than Esperanto or Volapük
or English.

Oh, Mandarin has both L and R.  It's Japanese that has only R.  Maybe
Indonesian only has one. Don't know about other Oriental languages.

By and large the 'competitors' of ceqli are harder to pronounce than ceqli
is.  I include Esperanto and Interlingua, and the big 'natural' auxiliary
languages ? English, Arabic, Russian, German, French, Mandarin, Spanish,
Portuguese, Swahili....

Some conlangs are, indeed, simpler than ceqli. Some allow no consonant
clusters,  for example.  But this results in lack of redundancy and/or
Japanese-style lo-o-ong words.
-- 

Rex F. May (Baloo) 
Daily cartoon at: 
http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp
Buy my book at: 
http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/book-GesundheitDummy.htm