Print

Print


None of the Finnish translations of the f-word violate Finnish phonological
constraints, according to Wiktionary, nor do they all feature fricatives
(uncommon in Finnish); whilst in Arabic "Allah" (literally "the God", is
the only native word to feature the phoneme /l/ (XSAMPA) (there are also
loanwords which do), so I guess violation of phonological constraints is
neither necessary for profanity (f*ck and duck could just as easily swap
meanings), nor limited to it.

Jeff
On 10 Feb 2014 22:57, "Matthew George" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Profanity, I'm told, often involves short words.  And I've heard people say
> before that the structure of the words is important, such that fictional
> profanity that lacks a particular pattern of plosives or fricatives doesn't
> satisfy them.
>
> Are there any examples of languages, real or created, in which the 'bad
> language' violates the normal phonological rules?  And is the only part of
> the language to do so?
>
> I had a crazy thought - in the culture I'm creating, profanity is never
> written, with various collections of random symbols substituting - the way
> English curse words are sometimes censored out.  But it's not censorship or
> delicacy, the orthography simply can't represent the nonstandard sequence
> of sounds which occur only in curse words.
>
> Matt G.
>