Sai Emrys wrote:
> OK, so. How about a slightly less ... controversial topic, this time.
> This is the first in a series of queries.
>
> I'd like to have a bunch of examples from Real Live (or trying-to-be)
> Conlangs to have at hand for my class as samples of how conlangers
> decide certain questions, and on what basis.
>
> I probably won't use *all* examples I get, but the more (and the more
> varied) the better - especially for the "motivation" part.
>
> I may use these during class (which will be recorded), or to print in
> lecture notes, online examples, quizzes, problem sets, or the reader.
> I will, of course, give credit for anything I use - please include the
> name and URL / email you'd like to be credited by (I'll use whatever
> your sig lists, as a default).

[log in to unmask]

> First off: phonetic / phonemic inventory.

Don't you want the name of the language?  It is Sohlob /sQ'KQb/.

>
> Q1: What is your *phonemic* inventory? I.e., what are all of the
> discriminated phonemes in your conlang(s). (IPA / CXS / X-SAMPA)


Phonemic inventory in CXS:

Vowels:
	FRONT	CENTRAL	BACK
HIGH	i (y)	i\	u

LOW	& (&\)	6	Q

Consonants:

	LABIAL	DNT/ALV	ALV-PAL	 VELAR	GLOTTAL
STOPS	p  b	t  d	ts\ dz\	 k g

FRIC	f  v	s  z	s\	 x  G	h

NASALS	(hm) m	(hn) n	(hJ) J	 (hng) (N)

LATERALS	K  l

TRILLS		r_0  r

SEMIV.	w		j


> (Side question: CXS is the "standard" notation for this list?)

Yes, practically.  Who can remember which of { and } are & or u\? ;)

> Q2: What are the allophones? I.e., for each phoneme, what are the
> "normal" variants that don't change meaning?

Vowels: /6/ may be [a], /&/ may be [E] and /Q/ may be [O].
This is largely dependent on dialect.  The Kidilib dialect
lacks /i\/, having /i/ where other dialects have /i\/, and
has /E/ instead of /&/.  Front rounded vowels occur only in
the Heleb dialect; to let them creep into ones pronunciation
of Classical Sohlob is highly stigmatized.

Consonants: outside the Kidilib dialect the phonemic status
of the voiceless nasals and /r_0/ is doubtful, hence the
notation with preceding |h| and the parentheses.

Voiceless stops and /ts\/ are actually aspirated and may
be aspirated lenes [b_0_h] etc. in some positions.
They are realized as unaspirated fortes only after /s/ and /s\/.

In the Kidilib dialect /rp rt rts\ rk/ may be realized as
voiceless trill plus voiceless lenis [r_0b_0] etc.

Next to voiceless consonants (which occurs only at word
boundaries) and at the beginning or end of utterances
the voiced stops are realized as voiceless lenes [b_0] etc.

The voiced affricate /dz\/ has a fricative allophone /z\/
mainly before /d/.

The voiceless trill /r_0/ is likely to have an allophone
[s`], since in Classical Sohlob it is written as if it
were |s\r| and it corresponds to simple /s\/ in the Heleb
dialect.  In Kidilib it is better entrenched and written |hr|.

In the Heleb dialect /dz\/ and /j/ have merged into a single
phoneme realized /dz\/ or /z\/.  Intervocalic /j/ has largely
disappeared in a process of contraction giving rise to long
vowels (including front rounded vowels).

> Q2b: If you have any, what are the connotations / implications of the
> different allophones? E.g., do you use them for different dialects,
> registers, "accents", etc.?

Yes definitely, as outlined above.  There is also the Lindjeb
"dialect" which inter alia lacks palatals and is really another
language (not mutually intelligible).  While Kidilib is clearly
a dialect Heleb is at least for social purposes the low register
of Classical Sohlob.  It is only religious functionaries, poets
and literati (often the same individuals) who actually speak
Classical Sohlob.  Heleb is not regarded as a proper medium for
serious writing, and since it lacks an orthography even shop-
keepers and similar people write in a mixed language: essentially
Classical Sohlob with spelling and grammar "errors" due to the
influence of Heleb.  There is also a southern dialect (Isterdjub)
which is not yet worked out.  Most importantly there is also a
proto-language Kedjeb (lit. "Ancient language") which all the
dialects descend from.

> Q3: How do your choices for the above reflect the goals of your
> language? E.g., if it's an auxlang [here!?], it's probably motivated
> by having common, strongly "universal" common-use phonetics to
> maximize learnability. So, for whatever your goals are for the
> conlang, how do they apply to the choices you made for phonetics /
> phonology?

I want historical depth and a naturalistic feel.  Another
goal was a phonology similar to Persian and Turkish, since
there are way too many pseudo-celtics out there.  (I love
Sindarin, however!)  Then I couldn't help myself but pepper
it with some phones that I find facinating, like voiceless
sonorants and /K/.  I'm a card-holding Icelandophile, namely.

> Thanks,
>  Sai
>
>

Answers to the phonotactics message will probably have
to wait to early next week...

--

/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

         Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
                                             (Tacitus)