New CBB

Jeg versøker ikke skrive dansk, lol.

Seto (South Estonian) uses <q> for final gemination.

---

Xonen: Split from Ny dansk ortografi.

Source? All I've ever heard is that it's used for /?/, which historically corresponds to the Finnish gemination phenomenon.

_________________

Isn't that what happened in Japanese too? Glottal stop/glottalization => gemination?

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

Let's say it's the glottal stop then, but isn't the Finnish final gemination a glottal stop if we are forced to idenfy an underlying form.

For example Campbells book of historical linguistics mentions that as an example of analogical levelling. Yet, Seto's own ortography never got super popular.

I take Finnish verb and suppose they are Estonian too.
standard estonian:
nukun - I sleep
nuku - sleep!

Seto:
nuku - I sleep
nukuq - Sleep!

Well. Actually, I personally would prefer to analyze it as /?/, yes. However, I'm not sure if it's been "officially" analyzed that way anywhere. And even if we do follow that analysis, there's still the difference (again, AFAIK) that the Seto /?/ is actually realized as [?], while in Finnish it's usually realized as gemination of the following consonant.


I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. Could you elaborate?


Yes, well. The verb nukkuma apparently does exist in Estonian, but it doesn't mean 'to sleep', but 'to cocoon'. Really, there's no need to "suppose" anything these days; Google is always just a couple of clicks away.

_________________

Back to the original topic, Seto marks a sound as indefinite as stöd with the letter <q>.
You probably know more about Seto. Good that it got clear.

About supposing, no, I'm not gonna philosifize.

We're actually covering this subject in a Võro class (taught by a native speaker) as I type, and yes, apparently the <q> is usually pronounced as the same kind of gemination as in Finnish, when the following word starts with a consonant: tulõq siiä [tulɤs si:æ] 'come here'. The main difference from Finnish appears to be that the glottal stop is very clearly pronounced before vowels or a pause (while in Finnish it can simply be omitted before vowels and is always omitted before a pause): tulõq [tulɤʔ] vs. Finnish tule [tule]. Also, there's of course the fact that in Finnish /?/ is, at best, a marginal phoneme, while in Võro it's extremely common.

And in fact, while he didn't clearly state it, it does sound to me like the teacher himself is actually using [ʔ] at least occasionally before consonants; my hypothesis right now would be that [ʔ] is assimilated before (unvoiced) obstruents but not before sonorants (at least not consistently).

_________________