Re: /S/ and /tS/ in natlangs (and now conlangs!)

[Padraic Brown <pbrown@POLARIS.UMUC.EDU>]

On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Steg Belsky wrote:

>
> Okay, so let me try to explain better. In words like "chicken", "jack",
> etc. i only pronounce a single sound.  In the name Tshernikhovsky, and
> other places where i see something written out as "tsh" instead of "ch",
> i usually draw-out the /t/ somewhat, making it somewhat perceptable and
> differentiated from the /S/ part of the consonant blend.

Allright; that makes more sense.  In other words, your "tsh" is not the
same as your "ch", yes?

>
> What do you mean exactly by the 'nasal element'?

I suppose I should clarify a few things.

The nasal mutation derives from a time when there was an "m" or an "n" on
the end of one word, like the Latin accusative singular or genitive
plural. This nasal has been since lost, but it leaves effects on the
following sound.  This effect is a nasal quality.  The reason why I
couldn't describe it in IPA (apart from the fact that there are apparantly
no nasalised consonants in the chart!) is that there is no way to clearly
predict whether the 'nasal element' is pronounced with the first word or
as a part of the second word.

For example, in the most ancient known levels of the language (8th cen.),
the rather poetic word for warrior was ille turccos, the accusative of
which was illem turccum.  As time passed, the writing caught up with the
pronunciation such that the -m of the article is shown to mutate the t- of
the following word: nom. il torcs, obl. le ndorch.

The example I gave yesterday was la sulys / la nzul (the word essentially
means 'eye' but is usually reserved for poetry and stories).  The point
about not predicting the location of the nasalisation is this: le ndorch
is pronounced something like /l@ ndorx/; while la nzul is pronounced
something like /la~ zul/.  You see, sometimes the nasal element is upon
the mutated word, sometimes upon the article; even though it is always
written upon the mutated word.  There are times when it's upon both.

>
> And, while i'm explaining things more in depth, the "mutations" as you
> termed them aren't at all as grammatically common as the nasal mutation
> of Kernu's "obl." form (what does that stand for?).  In Rokbeigalmki, to
> turn a noun/verb into a "doer" noun, a "dh" [D] is added to the end of
> the word, unless it ends in a "softenable" consonant like the four that
> started this thread, in which case, it gets softened.
> examples:

"obl." is the oblique case.  I suppose it's not really "oblique" in the
true sense of the word (i.e., the "non-nominative" case), in that there is
a regularly used dative (and a rarely used possessive).  It has
essentially taken over the ablative, the accusative, most of the
instrumental and a good portion of the genitive.  (The dative has the rest
of the genitive; the nominative has the rest of the instrumental, and the
lion's share of the vocative.)

I see that Rok. is using mutation for a different purpose.  Are such
mutations always used this way?  Kernu never uses mutations like the
following.

>
> fiizhag = a fight / wa'fiizhag = to fight
> -> fiizhagh = a warrior
>
> dayed = an announcement / wa'dayed = to announce
> -> dayedh = an announcer

Now the strange thing here is that Kernu doesn't reliably have stops at
the end of words; they usually get aspirated (essentially precisely what
Rok. is doing here).  Most Kernu speakers wouldn't be able to tell the
difference between dayed and dayedh; since both would most likely be
pronounced 'dayedh'.

>
> davas = a use / wa'davas = to use
> -> davash = a user

Final -s never mutates in Kernu.  Initial s- can take an "orthographic
aspiration"; but the pronunciation of the mutated and the unmutated "s"
are the same, [s].  In 'ys saliont' (they m. leave) and 'sa shaliont'
(they f.  leave); the verb in both is pronounced with an [s], even though
'sh' is technically a mutation.  This is done simply to show that a
mutation occurs in this environment.  Many other sounds show these
"orthographic mutations" as well.

>
> tarme = multiplication / wa'tarme = to multiply
> -> tarmedh = a multiplier
>
>
> -Stephen (Steg)
> (and since recently everyone seems to be using their names in their
> conlangs, why not...?)
> a.k.a.
>
> Tzvi Rish-Yeishedh (abriged version)
>

What's the unabriged version?

Padraic.