Re: Consonant Clusters at the Beginning of Words (I) Saul Epstein Thu, 06 Nov 1997 08:42:46 -0600 At 11:25 PM 11/5/97 -0600, Rob wrote: >At 08:29 PM 11/5/97 -0600, Saul wrote: >>Just to get a potential rule set going, I'd like to propose that any >>word-initial cluster of a stop and a fricative is permitted provided >>the two consonants have the same voice value -- either both voiced or >>both voiceless. This is almost a required rule, because without a >>pause or a vowel between the two consonants, it just naturally >>happens that the voicedness or voicelessness of one voices or >>devoices the other -- especially at the beginnings of words. So the >>permitted stop+fricative clusters would be: >> >>pf ps pc px ph >> bv bz bj >>tf (ts) (tc) tx th >> dv dz (dj) >>kf (ks) kc kx kh >> gv gz gj >>qf qs qc qx qh >> >>I know: that eliminates /tv/. If people are attached to it, we can >>work to preserve it... > >The only this which confuses me a bit is how that a voiceless consonent >in a cluster could devoice the other especially with /tv/. It takes a certain amount of time to move the vocal "cords" from a position which produces a voiceless sound to a position which produces a voiced sound. So there's a natural tendency when any sounds of different voice values are juxtaposed for the different values to interfere with each other. Sometimes one sound voices the the other, sometimes one sound de-voices the other. Sometimes the "dominant" sound is first in the sequence, sometimes second. This phenomenon of voice assimilation is itself governed by phonological rules. Now, when one of the two sounds is a vowel or an approximant, the openness and length of the sound gives a speaker more time to make a transition. So the /l/ in /pl/ may begin unvoiced, but becomes voiced before it's time to move on to the following vowel. There's much less time and room with something like /tv/. Whether it would come out as [tf] or [dv] -- or [t^v] -- depends on how Vulcan handles voice assimilation. >>Rob, this would modify your proposition that any stop can be followed >>by any continuant. That does seem true for the approximants (though >>we have no data for /rr/) and /r/. > >So at minimum an initial cluster could consist of any stop + any >fricative, probably any approximate as well. > >Then next, I'd like to know how we propose to explain kn, nm or wv? >stop+nasel stop, or nasel stop+nasel stop. Right. That's part II probably. /nm/ may just have to go. And is /wv/ at the beginning of a word? Yikes. >>Except of course, that /qy/ is highly unlikely. It would nearly always >>come out as some form of /k/. > >I need better information on how to say /q/ before I could agree or >disagree. Start with /k/, then start gradually pushing the part of your tongue that makes /k/ further back in your mouth to make it. It's probably safe to describe it as "as far back as you can go." /q/ is a uvular stop, and there's one point further back where one can make a pharyngeal stop before one bottoms out at the glottis. But pharyngeal stops are made with a different part of the tongue, whereas /k/ and /q/ are made with pretty much the same part. >>Remember that I'm only looking at possibilities regarding clusters at >>the beginnings of words. Different rules will govern clusters at the >>ends of words, as well as what sequences are permitted along syllable >>boundaries. Also, the /'/ phoneme seems to act largely as a >>"discontinuant," negating whatever rules would normally apply to the >>sounds immediately before and after. > >At the end of the words, we see many /r/+[stop], whether or not >it be nasel fricative or otherwise, almost the opposite of the >rule you just proposed for initial clusters. Interesting. Yes... -- from Saul Epstein liberty uit net www johnco cc ks us sepstein "Surak ow'phaaper thes'hi thes'tca'; thes'phaadjar thes'hi suraketca'." -- K'dvarin Urswhl'at