Print

Print


On 9/4/07, Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 3.9.2007 Paul Bennett wrote:
>  > I think my sound changes would be something like...
>  >
>  >-  i > i\
>  >-  y > u
>  >-  y: > ju
>  >-  i: > i
>  >-  e: > e
>  >-  E > a
>  >-  E: > E
>  >-  9 > ew
>  >-  9: > jo
>  >-  u > @
>  >-  u: > o:
>  >-  o > wo
>  >-  o: > wo:
>  >-  Q > o
>  >-  Q: > o:
>  >-  Ei > aj
>  >-  9y > oj
>  >-  Qu > Aw
>  >
>  > Leading to:
>  >
>  >:   i     i\ u
>  >:    e e: @  o o:
>  >:     E
>  >:      a    A
>
> I'm sorry, but these don't seem natural at all to me.

> :- y        >      i (like Icelandic & Faroese)
> :- y: (i:)  >      uj (like Faroese and Scanian)
> :- 9        >      e
> :- 9:       >      ew (like Scanian)
> :- 9y       >      oj (like Faroese)
> :- E        >      e
> :- E:       >      aj (like Icelandic & Scanian)
> :- Ei       >      ej (like Icelandic & Scanian)
> :- u        >      o
> :- u:       >      iw (like Scanian)
> :- o        >      o or @ (much of Swedish has o > 3\)
> :- Q:       >      Aw (like Icelandic)
> :- Q        >      @ or A (u-umlaut of *A failed to apply
> :                  in most of  peninsular Scandinavian, or
> :                  was reversed since Q > 9/2 or O/o
> :                  in isolated items)
> :- Qu       >      @w if Q > @, else ow -- nowhere Aw in Scand.
>
> i, e:, A, o: and perhaps (i:) remain unchanged.
>
> Vr > V: and since Vn > V~ perhaps Vrn > V:~. You should
>       probably get rid of r. Merger with l or n initially
>       would be Algonkian-like, though some south Swedish has
>       #r > zero (with Vr > V:) by way of r > R. Perhaps rr >
>       S? certainly hr > S! Other SC may come from sCj.
>
> resulting in a quite Algonkian
>
> :    i    i:
> :    e    e:   @    @:    o    o:
> :                         A    A:
>
> plus a bunch of Vj and Vw sequences. (jV and wV already
> being plentiful in ON -- NB w > v\ was probably late!)

See, stuff like this is exactly why I'm glad I found this list. I
could have spent *years* figuring out something as simple and
realistic as that, though I would have been more likely to have
produced something far more wrong than even my previous attempt.

I do think I might have to be (probably unreasonably) fond of
including /E/ in the vowel set. It's not in Proto-Alg, but it seems to
occur in what seem to be the most local Alg languages, often in
addition to /e/ and (less often) /e:/.

As I'm typing this, and checking my notes, I'm actually verging on
being tempted to have a three-way short ~ long ~ open contrast in /e/
and maybe /o/.

> Note that fC probably > wC too, unless fC > hC. Certainly pp
> tt kk would > hp ht hk, and Gt kt > ht. (Icelandic actually
> distinguishes tt > ht from kt/Gt > xt!)

Long stops are allowable (it seems) in at least some of the local
languages (and indeed Inuktitut goes to some trouble to create them,
AIUI), and I'm tempted to take my cue from those rather than from
"mainland" Norse languages.

> This would be scarily close to my own Hwinlenska, but I'll
> probably not do anything with that anyway.

Congratulations. You just became my "go to guy" for Finlaesk ;-)

Oh, cuss, cuss, cuss. I'm going to have to change even the very name
of the language. Proper preparation & planning prevents poor
performance, I guess, but I just keep finding new and interesting ways
in which I've been flat out stupid...




Paul