Print

Print


Thank you!

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Dirk Elzinga <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There is an aspirated/unaspirated distinction among voiceless stops but no
> phonemic voiced stops, so the unaspirated voiceless stops will sound a lot
> like voiced stops to the casual hearer. In my notes for the field methods
> class I taught 3 years ago, I find a lot of word-medial voicing, but not so
> much word-initially or -finally (there are some voiced stops in those
> positions, but for the most part they occur early on in the semester, when I
> was still getting used to listening). I don't remember now if there was a
> regular phonetic process of medial voicing. In fact, there's a whole lot
> about the phonology I still don't understand (vowel harmony in modern Xalx
> Mongolian is far from straightforward because of rampant vowel reduction;
> some triggering vowels reduce to schwa or are deleted altogether, but
> harmony operates as if they were still there in full).
>
> FWIW, my favorite word in Xalx is [ɢudziɮzɡɨn] 'strawberry'.
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Andreas Johansson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> Nothing to do with Conlanging, but I figured there's a better chance
>> of people here knowing the answer than anywhere else that I frequent.
>>
>> The spellings of medieval names, esp. ones from languages not natively
>> written in the Latin alphabet, are of course notoriously variable. One
>> particular variability that has struck me, however, concerns Mongol
>> names, where voiced and voiceless consonants seem to alternate without
>> apparent rhyme or reason: Genghis v. Chinggis, Chagatai v. Chagadai v.
>> Jagatai (v. umpteen other variants), etc. Is there some phonetic or
>> palaeographic reason for this hesitation?
>>
>> --
>> Andreas Johansson
>>
>> Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
>>
>



-- 
Andreas Johansson

Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?