[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:47:30 -0000 "habarakhe4
<theophilus88@hidden.email>" <theophilus88@hidden.email> writes:
> Also is [s<lat>] closer to an emphatic s or to [S]?
-
I'd say [S]. I've heard of /s<lat>/ going to /S/ in Arabic, and /s/ in
Hebrew, but never to emphatic S. I'm sure you could have lateral-S go to
emphatic-S, if your emphaticness is something like pharyngealization. But
if it's something conarticulated but distinct from tongue
shape/placement, like glottalization for instance, i don't see how it
could develop.
-Stephen (Steg)
"i'm a wabbit swaya, a guita pwaya;
with a nasty habit: kill the wabbit!
...and the'e won't be any mo'e wabbits awound -
no mo'e wogea wabbit, no mo'e peta wabbit,
no mo'e pwayboy bunny wabbits! a ha ha ha ha!
be vewy vewy ca'eful..."
~ 'ozzy fudd'
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com