:leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

:leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

Cross-posting from the other place; maybe people here might be interest too.

This is an English-descendent spoken around AD 2530. I'm posting the sound changes one stage at a time, then i'll post a bit about the grammar.


In the following, note that I use /L/ instead of /l/, for reasons of clarity. Also note that I'm not always careful distinguishing phonemic from allophonic change as I go along (since this results from the system as a whole rather than the individual changes).

------------------------------------

First Stage: ->2150
Most of the sound changes that take place during this first stage have either taken place already (in the splitting of General American from other forms of English) or are currently taking place in some American dialects. Key features are early vowel mergers, alveolar flapping, initial stages of vocalisation of coda sonorants, and most importantly the Northern Cities Vowel Shift - I'm assuming this language evolves from Inland North, or at least a dialect that has taken on IN features. The starting point is somewhat ad hoc - basically, to let me convert from my dialect into American (so I don't bother with changes that my dialect already shares with GA) and specify which american dialect we're talking about

1. /Q/ > /O/ before /f/, /s/, /T/, /N/, or /g/ (sometimes irregular)
The lot/cloth split

2. /Q/ > /A/
The father/bother merger.

3. /A/ > /V/ in the words 'was', 'because', 'everybody', 'somebody', 'nobody', 'anybody', 'what', 'from', and 'of'

4. /eI/, /E/, /{/ all > /E/ before /r/
The marry/Mary/merry merger

5. /I/ > /i:/ before /r/
The serious/Sirius merger

6. /V/ > /3/ before /r/
The hurry/furry merger

7. /E/ > /3/ before coda /r/ when unstressed, and /r/ then drops after /3/
My way of noting the rhotacised vowel in GA

8. /@/ > /I/
The weak vowel merger

9. /t/, /d/ > /tS/, /dZ/ before /r/
Already widespread

10. /hj/ > /C/
hy-strengthening, already inchoate

11. /aI/ > /VI/, and /aU/ > /VU/, before voiceless consonants
Canadian raising. The conditions, which currently vary between dialects, have been simplified by levelling between dialects. Currently, raising of /aI/ is much more common than that of /aU/, which is more stigmatised, but it is not unreasonable to imagine the latter also spreading (particularly under influence from dialects, such as that of New York, which already raise /aU/ unconditionally).

12. /Ur/ > /Or/
Pour/pore merger, already widespread

13. /{/ > /e/, /A/ > /a/, /O/ > /Q/, /V/ > /O/, /E/ > /V/, /I/ > /@\/.
The Northern Cities Vowel Shift, to an extreme extent.

14. /e/ > /I@/ before /m/, /n/, coda voiced stops, and any voiceless fricatives, but not in function words or irregular verb forms. Elsewhere, /e/ > /E/.
Importing phonemic ae-splitting from neighbouring Eastern dialects, translated into local NCVS-shifted phones

15. /u/ > /Y/ after coronal consonants, /j/, or /C/
U-fronting - less common overall in Inland North, but very widespread elsewhere, and not rare after coronals even there. Extending the fronting to /ju/ makes sense phonologically.

16. /j/ drops after coronal consonants, except where /j/ is the onset to a syllable
Yod-dropping

17. Medial /t/ and /d/ > /4/ preceding an unstressed vowel or syllabic sonorant, if following a vowel, /n/ or /r/; also when following /L/, provided previous syllable was not stressed. This change also occurs sporadically preceding a stressed vowel – typically where a real or perceived morpheme boundary exists, and also in some common, non-emphasised words (more common in adjectives and adverbs than in nouns and verbs).
Alveolar flapping

18. /aU/ > /AU/
Already widespread

19. Unstressed initial /@\/ dropped
Already widespread

20. /T/ and /D/ strengthen to /tT/, /dD/ when initial and the onset of a stressed syllable.
A common allophonic phenomenon

21. Vowels nasalise before coda nasals followed by another consonant or before coda /N/
Already widespread

22. Unstressed /@\/ drops before /n/, /m/, /L/ and /r/, except after /j/, /r/, or /w/; coda /n/, /L/ and /r/ become nuclei once vowels have been dropped
Syllabicisation of sonorants

23. Coda /t/ > /?/, when alone or as first element of cluster; both /t/ and /d/ dropped in codas when non-initial element of cluster. This change does not apply to /t/ before /T/ (as /tT/ is actually a dental affricate).
Already widespread

24. /w/ inserted between monophthong and coda /L/.
Under influence of east-coast dialects (and general tendency in many dialects)

25. /@/ inserted between stressed monophthong and coda /r/. Does not occur in some function words.
A common sub-phonemic process even in rhotic dialects

26. Unstressed /@\/ drops after /r/
Already widespread

27. /Uw/, /uw/, /Yw/ > /u/
The former already begun as the full/fool merger, the third already begun as the non-fronting of postcoronal /u/ before lateral, and the second may be notational (some already note /u/ as /uw/).

28. /Ow/ > /oU/, /Vw/ > /VU/
First part already begun as the dull/dole merger, second part is a merger of the vowels in ‘dell’ and ‘doubt’, though no actual morpheme-merger takes place (the prior phonemes exist in different environments). Also, the word ‘doubt’ itself is actually pronounced with /AU/, not /VU/, due to hypercorrection from the orthographic <b>.

29. /Qw/ > /QU/, /@\w/ > /Y/, /iw/ > /iU/, /Ew/ > /eU/
OK, four of these are notational changes. The other is novel, and I guess you could call it a kill/cool merger. High vowel mergers are common when L-vocalisation takes place, even though here it hasn't yet taken place fully.

30. Coda nasals after nasalised vowels drop
Already happens in some circumstances

31. Schwa drops between monophthong and coda /r/ when followed by voiceless fricative, or when followed by any fricative in the same syllable and morpheme (eg. ‘north’ becomes /nQrT/ while ‘northern’ becomes /nQ@r.Dn/; ‘carve’ becomes /karv/, but ‘shores’ remains /SQ@rz/, because the -s is a distinct morpheme).

32. /T/ and /D/ become /t/ and /d/, except after stops. Occasionally, these may undergo flapping to /4/, due to overlap of these sound changes, but this is uncommon.
A common change that removes unusual phonemes and fills the gap caused by glottalisation and flapping.

33. Unstressed /@\/ > /@/.
Technically only a notation change at this stage.

34. Initial /j/ > /j\/
A non-rare allophonic strengthening in a strong position, and paralleling the presence of /C/



Examples:
Note that these examples are only phonological evolutions of the current English - they assume (incorrectly) no semantic drift or changes in syntax.

General North American Standard English: /dZVn.rL nQrt mVrkn stI@~43d @\~L@S/ (Loss of /g/ in ‘English’, and many other words that once had coda /Ng/, is a hypercorrection)

English is an international lingua franca: /@\~L@S @zn @\~43nI@S.nL L@\~w@fra~ka/ (last two vowels in ‘lingua franca’ the result of hyperforeignisation)

In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /@\n@ hoUL @\~d@ grAU~ dVr L@\vd@ hab@?/

On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /an@ hYL, @ Sip w@\tVU? wuL sQ sOm hQrs@z/

There was a king who had no children: /dVr wOz@ k@\~ hu hEd noU tSYL.dZrn/

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /QUL CYmn bi~z ar bQ@rn frin ikwYL @\~ d@\gn@4in rVI?s/ (‘being’ as a noun is /bi~/, but the participle remains /bi.@~/)
User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1617
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by gestaltist »

Subscribing. I wish you used IPA. I guess I'll be using the SAMPA to IPA converter a lot.
cntrational
greek
greek
Posts: 661
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by cntrational »

I am hyped for this.
cntrational
greek
greek
Posts: 661
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by cntrational »

IPA-ized version of the final bit, btw:
Examples:
Note that these examples are only phonological evolutions of the current English - they assume (incorrectly) no semantic drift or changes in syntax.

General North American Standard English: /dʒʌn.rl nɒrt mʌrkn stɪə̃ɾød ɘ̃ləʃ/ (Loss of /g/ in ‘English’, and many other words that once had coda /Ng/, is a hypercorrection)

English is an international lingua franca: /ə̃λəʃ əzn ə̃ɾɜnɪəʃˑnλ λə̃wəfrãka/ (last two vowels in ‘lingua franca’ the result of hyperforeignisation)

In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /ənə hoʊλ ə̃də grɑʊ̃ dʌr λəvdə habəʔ/

On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /anə hʏλ, ə ʃip wətʌʊʔ wuλ sɒ sɔm hɒrsəz/

There was a king who had no children: /dʌr wɔzə kə̃ hu hɛd noʊ tʃʏλˑdʒrn/

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /ɒʊλ çʏmn bĩz ar bɒərn frin ikwʏλ ə̃ dəgnəɾin rʌɪʔs/ (‘being’ as a noun is bĩ, but the participle remains /bi.ə̃/)
Last edited by cntrational on 30 Jun 2015 13:51, edited 1 time in total.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

gestaltist wrote:Subscribing.
cntrational wrote:I am hyped for this.
[+1]
cntrational wrote:IPA-ized version of the final bit, btw:
Thanks. I'm personally fine with using a converter/reference chart/what have you since Salmoneus is using X-SAMPA, but I appreciate having the ability to look at all the sentences at once like this.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

Thanks for the interest! Sorry I got distracted...

Stage Two: 2150 > 2300
Two processes dominate this era. On the one hand, there are further vowel mergers, continuing those begun in the previous era, particularly to deal with the diphthongs arising from coda laterals and rhotics, and to reduce the number of nasal vowels. On the other hand, alveolar flapping has led to two coronal rhotics, and these now merge. In the process, they render the allophonic sulcalisation triggered by /r/ (but not by /4/) phonemic, including in other phonetic environments – sulcalisation is associated with both rhoticism and rounding, and the absence of laterals and sibilants. This phonemic sulcalisation constitutes the Great Vowel Split. The event is also associated with the derounding (but non-desulcalisation) of /Y/, the rounding of which is incongruous in the context of the system as a whole. In the later part of this era, some allophonic palatalisation takes place, and there is simplification of clusters.

1. /Q@/ > /OI/; /V@/ > /VI/ before /S/, /Z/, /tS/, /dZ/, /Z/, /C/, /j\/ or /N/ (following the /r/); otherwise /V@/ >/3/; /a@/ > /A/
Bore/boy merger, pear/purr merger; and ‘peartree’ and ‘pietree’ would now merge... if they were words

2. Unstressed /3/ > /@/
Calmer/comma merger (a new weak-vowel merger)

3. /iU/, /eU/ > /jU/; /I@/ > /j@/
The pal/peel merger and iotacism of old ‘broken A’

4. /QU/ > /AU/; /VU/ > /aU/
The call/cowl merger and the doll/dell merger

5. /VI/ > /3I/
A notational change

6. /Y/ > /I/
Derounding of the only round front vowel, and filling a gap left by the earlier backing of /I/.

7. a) Sulcalisation of all monophthongal /3/, /I/, /U/, /O/ and /Q/
b) Sulcalisation of all vowels after or before /r/
c) Sulcalisation of all vowels after /s/ or /z/
d) Desulcalisation of all vowels following /4/
e) Sulcalisation of all monophthongal /3/, /U/, and /Q/ after /r/
c) Sulcalisation of unstressed vowels before /s/ or /z/
e) Sulcalisation of all vowels before coda /L/
f) Sulcalisation of all stressed vowels before /w/
h) Desulcalisation of all vowels before or after non-coda /L/
i) Sulcalisation of non-high vowels in stressed syllables after /p/ or /b/
j) Desulcalisation of high vowels before a coronal
k) Desulcalisation of unstressed vowels before a coronal
l) Desulcalisation of all vowels before a glottal stop
m) Desulcalisation of all non-high, non-rounded vowels before /S/, /Z/, /tS/, /dZ/, when not before /r/
In all the above, note that diphthongs become sulcalised or desulcalised as units, except that the on-glide element in jV diphthongs is not sulcalised. Note also that jV diphthongs are counted as ‘high vowels’ for these purposes.

8. Coda /r/ drops.
A common change, and between schwa-insertion and sulcalisation, these instances of /r/ no longer have much content.

9. /4/ > /r/ (actually phonetically vice versa, but this notation is more elegant)
This is rarely a true phonemic merger, due to the sulcalisation. However, it does produce some rare mergers (e.g. berry-ly vs bettel-y)

10. Final syllabic /n/ > /@/
Syllabic sonorants often become vowels, especially given that unstressed final syllables are weak

11. Geminate /r/, /l/ and /n/ merge with singletons
Loss of gemination of sonorants far from unusual, especially as these geminates will be rare, mostly forming from compounds.

12. Glottal stops drop.
Glottals are weak, and not that common in this language

13. Coda /L/ drops
Essentially the final stage of a process of l-vocalisation that has produced many vowel changes

14. Nasalised diphthongs (not including jV sequences) denasalise

15. Nasalised /i/, /i’/, /I/, /I’/, /@\/ > /I~/
The leaned/loomed, teamed/tinned and creamed/crooned mergers. It is rare to have so many nasal vowels, so mergers are likely, especially as many of these vowels are rare.

16. Nasalised /u/, /U/, /u’/, /U’/, /@\’/, /3’/ > /U’~/
17. Nasalised /3/, /E/, /E’/, /V/, /a/, /a’/ > /a~/
18. Nasalised /V’/, /O/, /O’/, /Q/, /Q’/ > /Q’~/
19. /@~/ merges with /a~/, but /@’~/ instead merges with /U’~/
A series of further simplifications of the nasal vowel system (and diphthongs neutralise distinctions made in monophthongs)

20. /r/ drops after /tS/, /dZ/
Thanks to sulcalisation, this distinction was only rarely phonemic (although this does produce a chill/trill merger), and the /r/ in these clusters is already weak for many speakers.

21. Non-syllabic /L/ > /r/ after consonant
Again, sulcalisation has already shifted this distinction to the vowels in most cases

22. /tj/, /dj/, /Sj/, /Zj/, /sj/, /zj/, /nj/ > /ts/, /dz/, /hj/, /j/, /S/, /Z/, /ñ/ (/tSj/, /dZj/ not included)
23. /t/, /d/ > /ts/, /dz/ before /i(‘)/, /I(‘)/
Palatalisation is common cross-linguistically. These changes are at this stage only mildly phonemic

24. /u/ > /}/ (not when sulcal)
U-fronting is very common in many dialects

25. Two consecutive consonants of same type (stop-stop, fricative-fricative, sonorant-sonorant) become geminates of second element. Some
compounds avoid this.
Cluster simplification is already common in casual speech.

26. /C/, /j\/ > /S/, /Z/ before /i/, /I/, /u/, /eI/, /E/, /U/, /j/ or /@\/ (regardless of sulcalisation or nasalisation); elsewhere, /C/ > /x/, /j\/ > /G/.
Palatal fricatives are rare sounds, prone to loss.

27. /h/ in stressed onsets > /x/ before /A/, /a/, /Q/, /O/ or /3/ (including sulcals, nasals, and diphthong-onsets); elsewhere, /h/ drops.
This is a weak sound and is already dropped widely in many dialects. The shift of /C/ > /x/ allows a phonemic root for strengthening of /h/ in some circumstances.

28. Insertion of semivowels into hiatus. After sulcal vowels before a vowel, /r/ is inserted; after non-sulcal, non-low non-back vowels, /j/ is inserted; after non-sulcal non-low rounded back vowels, /w/ is inserted; before sulcal vowels after a vowel, /r/ is inserted; before non-low non-sulcal non-back vowels, /j/ is inserted; before non-sulcal non-low rounded back vowels, /w/ is inserted; between two other vowels, /r/ is inserted. This does not occur in diphthongs.
Hiatus is unusual, and glides are already commonly used in casual speech.

Examples:
General North American Standard English: /dZVn.rL nQ’t mV’k@ stsa~r3’d I~L@S/
English is an international lingua franca: /I~L@S @z@’ I~r3’ñ@S.nL LI~w@fra~ka/
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /@\n@ xoU’ I~d@ grAU’ dV’ L@\vd@ xab@/
On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /an@ I’, @ Sip w@\taU wu sQ’ sO’m xQ’s@’z/
There was a king who had no children: /dV’ wOz@’ kI~ } Ed noU tS@\L@/ (/tS@\L@/ is a simplified (but still strange) plural of /tSaI/; the ‘correct’ /tS@\LdZ@/ is rarely found as it is just too bizarre)
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /AU’ SIm@ bI~z a bOIn fri’n ikwI I~ d@\gn@rin r3I’s/




I should clarify, btw, that these 'examples' are only examples of sound change. They (falsely) assume no change in lexicon or syntax. I felt it made more sense to show one thing at a time...
Last edited by Salmoneus on 09 Jul 2015 00:48, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1617
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by gestaltist »

Can someone please explain what sulcalisation is?
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

...and now I realise my sulcalisation rules don't really make sense. Thanks for pointing that out!

Sulcalisation is the process of making sulcal. 'Sulcal' means that the tongue has a groove at the back of it. It's what distinguishes English rhotics, what makes american alveolar flapping not sound like a rhotic, and it's what some dialects use instead of or in addition to rounding.

But logically, it should be more likely to happen next to /s/, /z/, not less. So now I'm going to have to think about that one for a bit. I can always get away with saying that there's sulcal dissimilation next to /s/, /z/, but I'm not sure if i want to do that or just reverse some of my sulcalisations.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

Ah, OK, I was going to ask about sulcalisation as well, as Google wasn't being helpful. I did find "sulcus", though, so I figured it had something to do with tongue shape, but I wasn't sure what. Thanks for the explanation!

The changes and examples still look good, and I agree that showing one thing at a time makes sense.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

Yeah, got distracted again. I've now rejigged the above post. And here, have the third stage:

Third Stage: 2300 > 2400
During this era, the overcluttered vowel space is rationalised through a series of mergers and movements. Sibilance is also an issue.

1. /aU/ > /EU/; /OI/ > /oI/ (all with or without sulcalisation)
Decongesting the diphthong space (remember that although /aU/ is normally stable, here it was contrastive with /AU/).

2. /T/, /D/ > /f/, /v/ after labials, and dropped after velars.

3. /jU’/ > /ju’/, /jU/ > /j}/
4. /@\’/ > /U’/
5. /3/ > /@\/ (but /3’/ does not)
6. /V’/, /@’/ > /3’/
7. Sulcalisation neutralised in diphthongs
A series of vowel mergers to simplify the cluttered centre of the vowel space.

8. Syllabic /L/ > /U/ when final; syllabic /m/ > /3’/ when final
9. All remaining syllabic /m/, /n/ or /L/ > /@/; except that the clusters /mb/ and /mp/ first become prenasalised /mb/, and likewise /nd/ and /nt/ first become /nd/, and /nk/ and /ng/ become /ŋg/.
Syllabic consonants are not particularly common, and can easily degrade, particularly as in this language they are always unstressed.
10. /@/ > /a/ when final or preceding a sonorant; otherwise, > /@\/

11. /ks/, /ts/ > /tT/; /gz/, /dz/ > /dD/. These changes may not occur across a morpheme boundary – in particular, this does not apply to plurals in /-s/ or /-z/. The desibilantisation is initially allophonic preceding or following non-sulcal vowels, but spreads to become universal, through disambiguation from the following presulcal affrication.
12. /tT/, /dD/ > /T/, /D/, when following consonant.

13. Before sulcal vowels: /t/ > /ts/, /d/ > /dz/, /p/ > /pf/; before rounded and stressed sulcal vowels, or in initial position before sulcal vowel, /k/, /g/, /G/ > /kʷ/, /gʷ/, /Gʷ/; before other sulcal vowels, /k/, /g/, /G/ > /kS/, /gZ/, /Gʷ/.
Sulcal vowels are sometimes associated with affrication, and sulcalisation involves velar/uvular tongue movements that could become secondary articulation.

14. /j/ inserted after /gn/, /kn/, /kl/, /gl/ clusters, when not the onsets to stressed syllables. /nj/ > /ñ/ again.
Reflecting initially allophonic backing after velars.
15. /k/, /g/ > /kʷ/, /gʷ/ after sulcal vowels.

16. /fj/ > /hj/; /rj/, /lj/ > /R/ (in fact /r_r/, but /R/ is easier to type)
The first is a debuccalisation encouraged by the distance between /f/ and /j/, while the latter is a variant on palatalisation.

17. Coda /t/, /d/ > /?/
Reiterating an earlier change...

18. /aI/ > /AI/
19. /I~/ > /e~/
Lowering of nasal vowels is very common

20. Initial /j/ > /hj/

21. When unstressed and in a closed syllable: /i/ > /I/, /i’/ > /I’/, /u’/ > /U’/, /u/ > /U/, /}/ > /@\/, /a/ > /E/, /a’/ > /A/, /Q’/ > /A/, /Q/ > /O/, /O/ > /V/
Weakening (mostly centralisation) is common both for closed vowels and for unstressed vowels

22. /s/, /z/ > /S/, /Z/ before coronal consonants or before high vowel, or intervocalically after stressed non-low vowel
The apical alveolar sibilants have by now become quite fronted, as dentals or denti-alveolars, to fully disambiguate from the apical postalveolar sibilants. However, this disambiguation has become less necessary due to sulcalisation, and so the dental sibilants are free to move backward. The merged sibilants in these environments may be thought of as intermediate between, or variable between, alveolar and postalveolar.

23. Unstressed vowels not in the final syllable are dropped before stops, except after a cluster or geminate, or after an initial stop which differs in voicing from the stop that follows.
English unstressed vowels are already very weak.

24. /Gʷ/ > /w/; /G/ dropped.

Examples:
General North American Standard English: /dZVnrU nQ’? m3’ka sTa~r3’? e~L@\S/
English is an international lingua franca: /e~L@\S @\z3’ e~r3’ñ@\SnU Le~w@\fra~ka/
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /@\na xoU e~da grAU dz3’ L@\vda xaba/
On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /ana I’, a Sip w@\tEU wu sQ’ sO’m xQ’sa/ (/xQ’sa/ is a novel plural replacing /xQ’s3’z/, an is equivalent to our ‘horsen’)
There was a king who had no children: /dz3’ wOZ3’ ke~ } E? noU tSILa/
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /AU SIma be~z a boIn fri’n ikwI’ e~ d@\gn@\rin r3Is/
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

Penultimate diachronics:

Fourth Stage: 2400 > 2500

During this period, the main driver of change in the language is still the lingering surfeit of vowels that have been the result of sulcalisation. Several vowel mergers occur, though relatively few words are merged as a result, due to the specificity of their environments. The unusual distribution of diphthongs is also adjusted, and there is some continuing refinement of the fricatives/affricates.

1. /oU/ > /o/
2. /U~/ > /o~/
3. /EU/ > /3U/
Mirroring existing /3I/

4. Non-sulcal /Q/, /O/ > /A/, /V/
Clearing up low vowel congestions through rare mergers

5. /O/ > /o/ before nasals
6. /aI/ > /AI/, /oI/ > /uI/

7. Intervocalic /hj/ > /j/; all remaining post-consonantal /j/ drops

8. /u’/ > /U’/; /U/, /u/ > /}/
9. /I/ > /I’/; /i’/ > /i/
Clearing up high vowel congestions. (The last of these produces a bleed/breed merger)

10. /tS/, /dZ/ > /s\/, /z\/, when intervocalic, /ts\/ and /dz\/ otherwise
11. /kS/, /gZ/ > /ts\/, /dz\/
12. /tT/, /dD/ > /T/, /D/ (though often allophonically affricated when initial).
These alveolo-palatal sibilants are closed laminals, in contrast to the apical /S/ and /Z/. The distinction becomes great enough that the affrication is reduced to a secondary quality, lenited intervocalically. Or, to put it another way, intervocalic lenition of affricates creates new sibilants, because the method of articulation of the affricates was already different from that of the existing sibilants.

13. /a’/ > /A/
14. /E’/ > /V/
15. Sulcalisation ceases to be phonemic
The last of the anti-sulcalisation changes.

16. Nasal vowels become long, non-nasal
They’ve been allophonically long for a while (which is common), and the nasality is simply no longer required.

17. /T/ > /t/ after fricatives
18. /R/ > /L/ after consonant, otherwise > /r/
A rare sound both in the language and cross-linguistically, never likely to survive long.

19. /s/, /z/ > /s\/, /z\/ after /i/, /I/, after diphthongs ending in /U/, or before velar consonant
20. /eI/ > /e:/ before /S/, /Z/, /s\/, /z\/, /j/; remaining /eI/ > /EI/
The palatal glide is swallowed up by the following consonant, but the allophonic lengthening remains

21. Intervocalic or initial /j/ > /z\/

22. Coda /g/, /d/, /gw/ and coda sonorants are dropped before sonorants, producing geminate sonorants. Coda /b/ before a sonorant > /v/.
23. Voiceless coda stops become voiced before sonorants
24. /pf/ > /pS/


Examples:
General North American Standard English: /dZVnr} nQ? m3ka sta:r3? e:L@\S/
English is an international lingua franca: /e:L@\S @\z3 e:r3ñ@\Sn} Le:w@\fra:ka/
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /@\na xo e:da grAU dz3 L@\vda xaba/
On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /ana I, a Sip w@\t3U wu sQ som xQsa/
There was a king who had no children: /dz3 wOZ3 ke: } E no ts\ILa/
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /AU SIma be:z a buIn frin ikwI e: d@\ññ@\rIn r3IS/
Last edited by Salmoneus on 10 Jul 2015 17:04, edited 1 time in total.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

Very impressive, as usual. The changes you've described seem naturalistic and logical to me, but still interesting to read about.

I wish I could comment on more specific things, but the only real question that occurred to me while reading these past two posts (and the one before that's been edited) was this:
Salmoneus wrote:16. Nasal vowels become long, non-nasal
They’ve been allophonically long for a while (which is common), and the nasality is simply no longer required.
Salmoneus wrote:All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /AU SIma be~z a buIn frin ikwI e: d@\ññ@\rIn r3IS/
My apologies if I've accidentally overlooked something, but given change 16 from the fourth stage of the language, wouldn't the third word of the last example sentence be pronounced /beːz/, not /bẽz/?
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

No, you're quite right. Edited. Thanks for spotting it.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

Fifth Stage: 2500 > 2530
This ‘stage’ is largely particular to certain regions of North America at present, although it likely will become the standard on Earth, at least. It is worth pointing out that many of these changes actually began some time before 2500, but only in the last 30 years have become dominant in colloquial speech. The vowel changes are known as the ‘American Vowel Shift’. Together, these changes create the distinction between leewęfraaka staarɜ’ (the standard language on Earth) and leewęfraaka nɔ̨́mɜ́gniz (the local colloquial standard among native speakers in North America, which has recently gained limited official status for some purposes but is still rarely found in writing). These languages are named leewefraaka thaarɜ and leewefraaka nɔ́mɜ́gniz respectively in the modern vernacular – the ‘shift’ from st- to th- is not in fact a later development, but reflects a regional outcome of the initial cluster in North America, which was never incorporated into the standard.

1. /}/ > /y/, /I/ > /1/
2. /o/ > /u/, /O/ > /o/, /Q/ > /O/
3. /EI/ > /E/, /3I/ > /3/ before /S/, /Z/, /s\/, /z\/ or /j/
4. /AI/ > /QI/, /EI/ > /aI/, /AU/ > /aU/, /3U/ > /@U/, /3I/ > /@I/
5. /QI/ > /Q/ before /S/, /Z/, /s\/, /z\/ or /j/
6. /@\/ > /e/
7. Loss of glottal stops
8. Coda /p/, /b/ > /?/ when not followed by sonorant
9. /ts/, /dz/ > /s/, /z/

Examples:
General North American Standard English: /dZEnry nO m3ka Ta:r3 e:LeS/
English is an international lingua franca: /e:LeS ez3 e:r3ñeSny Le:wefra:ka/
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit: /ena xu e:da graU z3 Levda xaba/
On a hill, a sheep without wool saw some horses: /ana 1, a Si? wet@U wu sO sum xOsa/
There was a king who had no children: /z3 woZa ke: y E no ts\ILa/
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights: /aU S1ma be:z a buIn frin ikw1 e: deññer1n r@Is\/
Last edited by Salmoneus on 21 Jul 2015 18:06, edited 1 time in total.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

I like the bits of backstory, so to speak, that come along with each set of sound changes. If you'd like to, would it be possible for you to give at least a general explanation/description of the setting(s) in which this language will be spoken?

Regarding change #8 of this latest batch, would vowels be considered sonorants, or would that group only include consonants? Actually, if /p/ or /b/ were to precede a vowel, would they ever still be considered part of a previous syllable's coda?

Nitpicking based on likely erroneous assumptions; feel free to ignore: Comparing these example sentences to the last set, it seems that some of the sibilants have changed in terms of exact POA. Am I accidentally overlooking the rule(s) explaining this? Also, was the descendant of the word "beings" meant to be nasalized again? Finally, I'm ashamed to say I'm not too familiar with X-SAMPA, so I'm sorry to have ask about whether /L/ is a palatal or velar lateral approximant, and about if /ñ/ is a palatal nasal?
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

shimobaatar wrote:I like the bits of backstory, so to speak, that come along with each set of sound changes. If you'd like to, would it be possible for you to give at least a general explanation/description of the setting(s) in which this language will be spoken?
See below.
Regarding change #8 of this latest batch, would vowels be considered sonorants, or would that group only include consonants? Actually, if /p/ or /b/ were to precede a vowel, would they ever still be considered part of a previous syllable's coda?
Good question. I guess I mean it to include vowels. I guess further that they could be considered codas where there was a morpheme break in some case; but then, some of these cases would end up with the glottal stop anyway due to analogy.
Nitpicking based on likely erroneous assumptions; feel free to ignore: Comparing these example sentences to the last set, it seems that some of the sibilants have changed in terms of exact POA. Am I accidentally overlooking the rule(s) explaining this?
The rule explaining this has been overlooked due to having been changed - you caught me again (I swapped the postalveolar classes at one point, clearly didn't change the sample).
Also, was the descendant of the word "beings" meant to be nasalized again?
Nope.
Finally, I'm ashamed to say I'm not too familiar with X-SAMPA, so I'm sorry to have ask about whether /L/ is a palatal or velar lateral approximant, and about if /ñ/ is a palatal nasal?
In this case it's not an x-sampa issue. Here, /L/ means simply /l/, because /l/ is very easily mistaken for /I/ in the font I typed it in. I did explain that at the beginning, but I can't blame you for overlooking it...
And /ñ/ is being used here as a palatal, or at any rate palatalised, nasal, because I can't remember what the sampa for that is. Sorry, I should have explained that! [I don't think it matters whether it's strictly palatal or only palatalised...]



Regarding setting: this is a setting I do things in every now and then. It's set in about 2532-ish, and it's theoretically an interstellar SF scenario with FTL and intelligent aliens. However, the FTL is limited, and the aliens are some distance away.

Timeline:
21st century: things get gradually more shit
22nd century: things continue to get more shit, eventually FTL is discovered. The internet is abolished (sort of).
23rd century: things get better, a few new colony worlds begun, and then aliens are discovered
24th century: things getting better financially, but developing into corporate feudalism. More worlds colonised, aliens largely ignored, few skirmished. At the end of the century, however, aliens temporarily conquer earth, vast lost of life, military coup d'etat to preserve the species.
25th century: military rule develops into totalitarian state, further wars. Mass colonisation early on (lots of starving people on ruined earth), but this tails off (colonies too in danger). Humanity only really survives due to intervention of other alien species, but doesn't get on with them.
Early 26th century: more of the same, although there's been a degree of liberalisation.

Some key aesthetic points:
- FTL ships are like giant submarines. Ships are expensive, but travel is very cheap - but very slow. Age-of-sail-type communication speeds between colonies. Mechanics of FTL bugger up electronics on board ships, so FTL travel feels low-tech and space combat is difficult.
- Civilisation depends on tholin mining and burning. Tholins are complex hydrocarbons found in gas giants and on icy outer planets, so we're essentially talking about a continuation of fossil fuel culture.
- Colonies are relatively small, and feel isolated. They tend to be sources both of raw materials (strip mining on a planet with a breathable atmosphere turns out to be cheaper than robotically mining asteroids) and heavy industry.
- Earth is much more populated than today, despite a huge percentage of the population dying off in and after the Occupation. It's also much hotter than today. Different regions, like different colonies, retain a degree of autonomy, mostly in semi-feudal aristocratic societies, but everything is ruled over by the military, who have a totalitarian and communist orientation.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

Salmoneus wrote:In this case it's not an x-sampa issue. Here, /L/ means simply /l/, because /l/ is very easily mistaken for /I/ in the font I typed it in. I did explain that at the beginning, but I can't blame you for overlooking it...
Oh, sorry, you certainly did explain that quite clearly right off the bat. Darn, it's been too long since I've read over the first post, apparently.
Salmoneus wrote:Regarding setting: this is a setting I do things in every now and then. It's set in about 2532-ish, and it's theoretically an interstellar SF scenario with FTL and intelligent aliens. However, the FTL is limited, and the aliens are some distance away.
Salmoneus wrote:Timeline:
Salmoneus wrote:Some key aesthetic points:
Very interesting! I especially like that it feels relatively realistic, in that it seems like a continuation of historical trends on a larger, but not impossibly large, scale (I wouldn't be surprised to hear that was the goal for this, so to speak, or at least similar to the goal).
cntrational
greek
greek
Posts: 661
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 03:59

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by cntrational »

Tholin/fuel mining -- is Titan's methane used for anything?

How many planets and moons are colonized within the solar system? I've only seen Earth and Venus mentioned.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3033
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by Salmoneus »

cntrational wrote:Tholin/fuel mining -- is Titan's methane used for anything?
It used to be, and it probably still is - there are likely to be more complex hydrocarbons than just methane on titan (I've heard there may be a tholin snow sometimes?). But anyway, Titan was an early target for mining (as was Saturn itself), but it's a tricky place to work - all hills and mud and lakes, so the outer ice planets became more important than it.
How many planets and moons are colonized within the solar system? I've only seen Earth and Venus mentioned.
Been a while since I've planned out the solar system, but as a guide:
Tens of billions of people: Earth
More than a billion people: Venus
Tens of millions of people: Europa, maybe Triton
Other sizeable populations: Mars, Ganymede, Oberon, Ceres, Terminus (a large outer planet with an atmosphere)
A bunch of other places, particularly icy outer dwarf planets with subsurface oceans, have some population.

Of the conventional planets, Mercury has small military bases, Mars is a tourist resort and home to some hermits, Jupiter is uninhabited, Saturn has a small population (originally gas-miners, now has a small tourist industry), and Uranus has a small population (mostly religious). Neptune has a tiny population too.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: :leewefraaka, a future Anglic language

Post by shimobaatar »

Would terms like "tiny" or "small" be used to describe populations of a few hundred people, or closer to ten thousand? That is to say, are those terms being used relative to the populations of Earth, Venus, Europa, and Triton in-world, or are they meant to represent what we would call a small population in the real world?
Post Reply