Oskar Gudlaugsson wrote: > Why don't you keep the /n/ phoneme and state that the sequences /en an on/ > are realized as [e~ a~ o~]? That way, you can have syllable initial /n/. And > you save yourself two phonemes, since the nasalized vowels would no longer > be independent phonemes. Isn't there, after all, some law that says 'all > languages have at least one nasal'? (I know it also says 'all languages have > at least one plosive', but I think they've all got a nasal too.) Not true, surprisingly enough. There are a handful of languages which have no nasals--most notably a handful of Salishan and Wakashan languages (formerly) spoken on the northern Pacific coast of North America. Matt.