New CBB

Alright, I've been working on a slightly different orthography and have been organizing my phonology. I'll wait on phonotactics until I get the OK on this (don't worry, I have ideas.)

Vowels: /a ɛ i ɔ u ʏ/ <a e i o u y> (I haven't decided on whether I should have a vowel lengthening system yet.)

Consonants: /b ʃ ʒ d ɸ g ħ x k l ɭ m n p r ʀ s t ts v j z ð θ/ <b c ç d f g h (h) k l (l) m n p r gg s t ts v j z dh th>


Diphthongs: /eɪ aɪ ɔɪ/
<ei ai oi>

Syllable stress is irregular and is marked with a macron. (subject to change but not drastically)

The language is called Ruic. It will have mostly free word order due to a vast case system, but its main word order will be VOS (in writing, VSO.) Its alignment is a Tripartite system, with the ergative case as the unmarked subject of transitive verbs, accusative as the marked direct object of transitive verbs, and the absolutive case as the marked subject of intransitive verbs.

I hope the phonology and the orthography aren't super Englishy yet again.

_________________
Magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri. -Multomixtor

The vowels look okay. I think Mandarin has something like that, (except that the [e] and [o] are really allophones of an underlying /ə/).

I'd recommend organizing your consonants by manner and place of articulation. Here's your consonants in that format:
/p b t d k g ts ɸ v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ x ħ m n r ʀ l ɭ j/
I'd advise changing /v/ to /β/, and dropping /ɭ/, which seems out of place without any other retroflex consonants.

To me, it looks pretty European, with its dental fricatives and voicing contrast. That's okay if you want it to be that way, but if you'd prefer a more alien phonology, look at the phonologies of Nahuatl,MalagasyWalpiri, or Cantonese. Alternatively, you could just go to this ZBB thread.

_________________
"Wait for the starvation of glaciers, chicken hamburger Noel Weber Arthur."

= | = | =

I'd transcribe your <y> as /y/, possibly also <e o> as /e o/.

Also agreeing with Solarius, you might wanna review the assymetry of /ɸ v/, and the retroflex l seems a bit out of place. I like the /r ʀ/ contrast though.

In general it's a very European-esque system, but I lay no judgement in that.

Also, <ç> for /ʒ/ strikes me as a tad.. unusual.

That's an awesome thread indeed, Nort ought to repost it on here ;(

_________________
КЕРВЕНСКИЙ

A possible explanation for having /ɸ/ rather than /f/ is that it came from a lenited /pʰ/ or /p͡ɸ/. Another possible source could be /ʍ/.

IIRC Fijian has voiced /β ð/ and voiceless /f s/.

It's likely that bilabial fricatives change to labiodental once, since the latter are the more common ones.

But since I like bilabial fricatives, you could go the other way around and change /v/ to /β/.

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

I don't really like the IPA distinction between mid-close and mid-open vowel... Since I rarely do 7-vowel systems, it would be enough for me with /e/ and /o/ for mid-vowels. For more detailed phonetic transcriptions, one could use the ̝ ̞  diacritics.

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

Why? Does it just serve as a more general description of the phoneme?


Can't I have the bilabial and the labiodental fricative too? http://classweb.gmu.edu/accent/nl-ipa/spanishipa.html
Or does it not make sense? Also, what could I do to keep the retroflex? It only exists in final position.


It's meant to be mostly European. Are there any parts that aren't very European? If it's excessively European, I want to see what I can do to change it a little. I want it to be easy for me to pronounce though (I plan on speaking and singing in it, a lot.)
And in regard to <ç> for /ʒ/, I put the cedilla on it to show that it was the voiced postalveolar fricative in contrast to the voiceless <c>. Is it a bad unusual or is it okay?

_________________
Magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri. -Multomixtor

Since phonemes are abstract - they can't be pronounced "by themselves", but only in the form of some concrete phone - there is in principe always a choice how to transcribe them. One could even decide to use some kind of dummy symbols.

But there are certain factors that may influence one's choice. One could chose the use the phonetic symbol that represented the most common allophone. In your case, it may well be [ʏ], [ɛ] and [ɔ]. But there is another principle saying that you should select the symbols that are simplest to type - like symbols without diacritics, or symbols that can be typed on a regular keyboard. Which way to go when principles collide like this is basically a matter of preference.

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

I want to correct one big misconception I see a lot- Non-European does not mean hard to pronounce! Look at Hawai'ian or Japanese. Neither of those are very difficult for L1 english speakers to speak in, but they are still quite un-european.

_________________
"Wait for the starvation of glaciers, chicken hamburger Noel Weber Arthur."

= | = | =

I prefer /ɛ ɔ/ to /e o/ myself. /e/ sounds too much like /i/ and /o/ sounds too much like /u/, from the pronunciations on this website.

_________________
___________________ I am the Great Rabbit. Fear me, O Crabs!

If you listen closely, /e/ actually sounds more like /eɪ/.



I'm aware of this, but this language is supposed to have a bit of a Greek flair to it (At least that's how I wanted it to go, I've learned that how I want it and how it actually turns out are two different things. ) I like European and Semitic phonologies the best.

_________________
Magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri. -Multomixtor