Thrice Xandvii wrote:So... You've made an entirely new system complete with a suite of brand new invented terminology just to be contrary to an accepted system.
Got it.
(Just to be clear, this isn't coming from any reliable source, you're just making it all up as you go along, correct?)
This is entirely correct. I have no intentions to apply run analysis to any existing language, and if one is uncharitable about what I am doing – I detect a minor amount of disgust of what I am doing here from you – one might refer to this as a "blind faith and a juggling of symbols". Symbols here being the (more or less atomic) letters of the IPA.
The actual origin of phonoruns as an idea came from reading about the non-obviousness of syllabification. Having also read about how Euclidean geometry can be "crippled" by removing some of its axioms, and how you can e.g. remove or add places of articulation at will, I try doing the same to another part of phonetics here, and literature elsewhere (with literature, the item removed from it is the concept of a character). This is done more out of curiosity rather than any claim of creating a "game changer" or a "paradigm shift", and removal and simplification of concepts is of course a whole lot easier than making a brand new one from scratch.
However, this is not to say that phonoruns are impossible objects, nor that they are indistinguishable in "practice" from syllables:
Znex wrote:How exactly do phonoruns manifest in speech? Can you provide an audio example of how it works?
The primary distinction of phonoruns to syllables is that of prosody, as I have mentioned above. However, it might pay to use some explicit sentences to illustrate the difference.
Take the sentence:
psk ael bffs "I eat the newspaper". In IPA it would be /psk aɛl bp⁺s/ = [psk(..)aɛɫ(..)b͡β̆p͡f̆s] (the /l/ = [ɫ] is an edge effect, which is just phonotactics. More later). Each (..) represents a
medium (word) gap. Furthermore, because each word has three phonemes, they take roughly the same amount of time.
Now, if we modify the sentence slightly such that we have
psk stael bffs "I do not eat the newspaper", the IPA would become /psk staɛl bp͡f̆s/ = [psk(..)st(.)aɛɫ(..)b͡β̆p͡f̆s], with the (.) taking up a
small but noticeable gap. This would be slightly different if you were to analyse it with syllables, which would make it /psk.staɛl.bp͡f̆s/ and therefore take less time than what phonoruns would predict, and because Rattssaw is defined to be run-based, then we can learn the difference between a hypothetical syllabic-Rattssaw and the ordinary one.
Or put simply, between each run there is a small gap that would not be present in a syllabic language. Usually that gap is glottalised, but this is not always the case.
As for an audio sample... I'm not sure if I can serve one up to you (needless to say, it's a lot easier to make a system than to actually use it!) but I hope the IPA symbols above can give you an idea of how it works.
Conlangs: EP (EV EB) Yk HI Ag Cd GE Rs, Ct, EQ, SX Sk Ya (OF), Ub, AKF MGY, (RDWA BCMS)
Natural languages: zh-hk, zh-cn, en