Ray Brown wrote: > I can think of languages that have /s/ but no other fricatives; but I > cannot think of any with just /T/. However, I don't see why at some stage > a lonely [s] could not have changed to [T].... >...in fact I would not be unduly surprised if a language were > found with /T/ as its only fricative. IIRC you or someone else mentioned Burmese, which has [T] reflecting *s; it may also have [s] from some other source, but I don't know. Apparently [T] is an acceptable pronunciation of /s/ in Acehnese, and characterizes at least one dialect thereof. Fijian has /D/ [D], also reflecting *s (and others), but no [T]~/T/; but also /s/ reflecting other proto-sounds. It also boasts /v/ [B], but no /f/. (Fijian /v/ reflects earlier *f.) Hawaiian has the sole fricative /h/, which is the merger of the same two earlier sounds, *f and *s. ObConlang: Proto-Kash had no *s at all; it did have *th and *ts, which developed to /s/ in many descendants. A major violation I suppose, but then they're aliens, and our "universals" may be quite -centric, and aren't necessarily Universal.