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


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

Re: discursives



--- In ceqli@yahoogroups.com, Rex May - Baloo <rmay@m...> wrote:
> on 2/21/04 9:39 PM, HandyDad at lsulky@r... wrote:
> 
> > --- In ceqli@yahoogroups.com, Rex May - Baloo <rmay@m...> wrote:

--SNIP--

> Tho the ceqli wordshape rule calls for one or more
> consonants at the beginning, it seems to in practice be one or two
> consonants.   Can we use Italian as a guide?  If it's permitted in 
Italian ?
> initial clusters, I mean ? it's permitted in ceqli?
> 
> Looking at the vocabulary, we have as initial clusters:
> 
> sf
> sk
> sp
> st
> ts
> xp
> xt
> zb
> 
> nothing for xk yet, but that'll be permitted.

What about the voiced equivalents of those in the list?
"zv, zg, zd, dz, zhb, zhd, zhg, zhv..."
Plus "xf".

> 
> That's not counting lrmn as consonants, of course.
> 
> The only thing I'm really crazy about that I think you don't like 
is the ts.

My concern is that a significant number of major world languages -- 
Asian and middle-Eastern ones, mainly -- have difficulty with 
consonant clusters, so I think we ought to permit schwa buffering. 
But if schwa buffering occurs between the two initial consonants of a 
word, then it aurally separates into a Ce-class word followed by a 
word with a single initial consonant:

"zbano" => "z'bano" => "ze bano"

Solutions are:

1) Prohibit initial consonant clusters (therefore, all consonant 
clusters).

2) Require full [e] pronunciation of letter "e" everywhere.

3) Require full [e] pronunciation in the words "se", "te", "xe", 
and "ze".

4) Prohibit the words "se", "te", "xe", and "ze".

5) Prohibit schwa buffering (i.e., demand accurate pronunciation of 
word-initial consonant clusters)

6) Not worry about it, figuring that we'll know when someone 
means "ze bano" not "zbano". 

I also looked at the Spanish model of schwa buffering, where they 
prefix 'sC-' words with a schwa before the 's'. But then the schwa 
runs into the tail end of the preceding word.

> but if you think about it, it's analogous to the c sound
> x is to c as s is to ts. They're both actually affricates, as is j, 
not
> clusters.

Quite so. Remember way back when I was urging that 'zh' be 
represented by "j" and 'j' by "dj"? And if we're going to have "ts", 
then why not "dz"? :-)

>  If we had an extra Roman letter, we'd use it for ts.  And it's
> very useful for German loanwords. as well as many Mandarin ones.  
And if we
> can agree on this set, I don't think we'll be needing any more.  I 
don't
> want any ps or bz or anything like that.
> -- 

--Krawn