Print

Print


>> >I have the following:
>> >
>> >- _t_ = /s/
>> >- _tt_ = /ht/
>> >- _d_ = /t/
>> >- _dd_ = /?t/
>> >- _k_ = /x/
>> >- _kk_ = /hk/ (thanks to some other rules)
>> >- _g_ = /k/
>> >- _gg_ = /?k/
>> >- _p_ = /f/
>> >- _pp_ = /hp/
>> >- _b_ = /p/
>> >- _bb_ = /?p/
>> >- _h_ = /s/ before stops
>> >- _s_ = /S/ before velars
>> >
>> >Does this seem like a plausible variant/outcome of an Icelandic-like
>> >process under Alg (and Inuktitut) influence?
>> >
>> >Paul
>>
>> h ([x]?) > s doesn't seem to fit in, if you're allowing preaspirates and
>> have s > S / _k. If there are [S x h] in the system, I'd expect h to to end
>> up as one of them, rather than > s.
>
>You're suggesting the following changes to the changes?
>
>_tt_ = /ht/
>_pp_ = /hp/
>_kk_ = /hk/
>_h_ = /S/ before stops
>
>The only problem I see in that is a purely-orthographic one: how do I
>write /S/ immediately before a stop if /s/+stop clusters may also
>exist? Is re-using 'h' sensible?

To some extent, but I'd just use s-caron, or x, or one of the other standard
written representations of /S/.


>What if /h/+stop clusters develop later?

As long as you have preaspirates, they shouldn't, at least as separate from
those...


>What about transcribing /S/+not-stop in borrowings? More
>irregularity than I'm comfortable with starts seeping in.

>Paul

Wait, you're talking about the nativ orthography, are you? <sh> or <ss> or
<sk> or something should do then? Or maybe even conflating /s S/ as <s>.

John Vertical