Help with phonological transcription

18 views
Skip to first unread message

Fuscian

unread,
Jan 7, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/7/98
to

=0AIn a message dated 1/2/1998 9:09:54 PM, you wrote:=0A=0A>Fuscian wrote=
:=0A[snip]=0A>> VOICED NASALS=0A>> velar, uvular, retroflex, alveolar, bi=
labial, labio-dental, reverse=0A>> labiodental (lower teeth touching uppe=
r lip), and ? (tongue touching upper=0A>> lip).=0A>=0A>Reverse labiodenta=
l is also termed dentilabial, the last is termed=0A>linguolabial.=0A=0ATh=
anks.=0A=0A>> "R"s=0A>> the (American) English kind, the Spanish kind, re=
troflex, and "extreme=0A>> retroflex" (I just thought up that name, not k=
nowing if there's a real one=0Afor=0A>> it=97it's a retroflex where the t=
ongue reaches further than a normal=0Aretroflex,=0A>> about to the velar =
area).=0A>=0A>Your 'extreme retroflex' is something that I refer to as ap=
icovelar,=0A>something that=0A>occurs in the Tsxaani liturgical language,=
=0A=0AWhere is (was) that spoken?=0A=0A> but seems to have vanished=0A>fr=
om (most?)=0A>of the modern spoken dialects.=0A=0AI'm not surprised!=0A=
=0A> It sounds rather like a very 'dark'=0A>retroflex with=0A>lateral & v=
elar/postvelar friction.=0A>=0A>> OTHERS=0A>> (voiceless) "h"; raspy and =
unraspy, and voiced and unvoiced velar=0Africatives=0A>> (that's 4 sounds=
); =0A>=0A>The raspy/nonraspy distinction would be challenging to notate.=
=0A=0ANot really=97see below.=0A=0A>>"extreme retroflex" voiceless and vo=
iced fricatives (that's=0A>> 2); English stlye s, z, voiced th, unvoiced =
th; and two others whose=0A>> identification I am very unsure of=97I can =
pronounce one of them=97I called=0Athem=0A>> voiced and unvoiced "lateral=
fricatives", thoguh I'm not sure tha=0A>=0A>Seems something was lost her=
e(?). I have found laterals (fricative or=0A>otherwise)=0A>are very easy =
to produce both ingressively & egressively. The sibilants=0A>/s, z/=0A>ar=
e more difficult, as they sound quite different when pronounced=0A>ingres=
sively,=0A>unlike most other fricatives (due to the obstruction of the te=
eth,=0A>tongue shape,=0A>etc.)=0A=0AYou're right, the s and z do sound ve=
ry different, but that's what they are.=0AAnd I'm sure that the other 2 l=
etters are not laterals=97I never should have=0Acalled then that in the f=
irst place. I guess they're kind of like the s and z=0Aexcept that =0Amo=
re of the tongue is raised. Maybe its palatal, or both at the same time.=
=0A.=0A>> bove down (not on computer!) as n, m, r, x, g, h, q, s, z,=0A>>=
t, d, and l with various diacritical marks stuck on them. =0A>=0A>I wou=
ld be interested to know what system of diacritics you have tried=0A>for =
these.=0A=0AWith m, n and r, I used them plain, and with a tilde, circumf=
lex, and an=0Aupside-down circumflex (wedge? I always forget their names)=
to represent the 8=0Anasals and 4 r's, with the plain version of each of=
them sounding the same as=0Ain English. H, s, and z are the same. I us=
ed an l for what I thought was a=0Avoiceless lateral, and a slashed l for=
its voiced version. T and d represent=0Athe voiceless and voiced dental=
fricatives (though actually, in some dialects=0Athey are the same sounds=
as in English, alveolar plosives). Then there's a q=0Afor the "apicovel=
ar" voiceless fricative and a q with a tilde for it's voiced=0Acounterpar=
t. And finally, x represents the velar voiceless fricative (not=0Araspy)=
and g the voiced velar fricative (not raspy), while a tilde over each=0A=
of them indicates raspiness.=0A=0A>They could be represented using either=
X-Sampa or another ASCII-IPA=0A>format,=0A=0AI'm not familiar with eithe=
r of those.=0A=0A>[snip vowel descriptions]=0A>This does represent a bit =
of a problem - certainly, if the tones were=0A>regarded as=0A>thirteen st=
eps within a speaker-relative octave (or perhaps an octave=0A>and a half?=
)=0A>then they could be equated to musical notes.=0A=0AWell, I should hav=
e been clearer about that=97there are six levels, or notes,=0Aand the res=
t are different combinations of them. But 1-13 still works fine.=0A=0A> =
Hmm - an ingressively sung=0A>language - =0A>now that _is_ a wild idea! Y=
ou could notate it with a three tier system:=0A>the=0A>phonemic string, a=
scalar tier to denote tone, and a third tier to=0A>denote the length=0A>=
perhaps using musical notation or numbers to indicate duration.=0A>[Lengt=
h] 3 2 7=0A>[Tone] 3 5 11=0A>[Phone] ho xan r=E4q=
=0A>Admittedly this is rather clumsy, but would get the idea across.=0A=
=0ARight and right.=0A=0A>Or perhaps notate the tone as a numerical index=
either before or after=0A>the given=0A>syllable (or syllables, if the to=
ne does not change):=0A>3ho5xan 11r=E4q ~ ho3xan5 r=E4q11=0A>Although I a=
dmit, I am not sure how to denote length - reduplication of=0A>vowels=0A>=
would create some monstrosities:=0A>hooo3xaan5 r=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4q11=
=0A=0AYes, I've tried that, and it gets even worse:=0Agiiiiiiiiiiiii1q[ti=
lde]eeee13m[circumflex]=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E44=0Awhich m=
eans: I might go today.=0AIn the new alphabet that word is 9 letters=0A=
=0A>> l's and tilded x's. I finally became so frustrated and upset that =
I=0A>> completely abandoned the hopeless idea of romanization and threw t=
ogether a=0A>> beautiful little (actually big) new alphabet that could re=
present the=0Alanguage=0A>> wonderfully. There is a letter for each cons=
onant, plus a letter for each=0A>> vowel with each of its tones (that's 9=
8 vowels!). There are also six other=0A>> letters, one of which is can b=
e placed in certain positions around a vowel=0Ato=0A>> show its length. =
I am very pleased with my new 129-letter alphabet. It=0Alooks=0A>> very =
runic, with many letters completely or partially stolen (I'm never=0Agivi=
ng=0A>> them back! so I won't say "borrowed") from either runic letters, =
roman=0A>> letters, or cyrillic letters. All of them have only straight =
lines and=0Atake=0A>> up the same amount of space (same width and height)=
. I'm not planning to=0A>> memorize it. =0A>=0A>The 'runic' alphabet so=
unds like a great idea. Hope I have an=0A>opportunity to =0A>see it one d=
ay.=0A=0AWell I'd love to put all my languages on the web, but I can't de=
al with HTML=0Aand I'm having other kinds of problems with wysiwyg [sp?] =
programs. One=0Acrashes when I'm using it and with the other, my modem s=
huts off before I can=0Afinish downloading it. I may just have to get Ad=
obe Pagemill soon.=0A=0A>If I come up with any other ideas, I will forwar=
d them to you.=0A>Regards,=0A>Bfool Wxouzwx=0A=0AThank you. (what is Bfo=
ol Wxouzwx? I know it's not your name)=0A=0AJTR=0A


Paul Roser

unread,
Jan 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/8/98
to

Fuscian wrote:
>=20

> In a message dated 1/2/1998 9:09:54 PM, you wrote:
>=20
> [snip]
> >Your 'extreme retroflex' is something that I refer to as apicovelar,
> >something that

> >occurs in the Tsxaani liturgical language,
>=20
> Where is (was) that spoken?

It is my artlang, spoken on an archipelago in the mid-Atlantic,=20
somewhat south of the Azores and northwest of Madeira. The=20
liturgical language has a number of _very_ exotic sounds, partly
to indicate that it is not the normal language of the street (these
sounds include several velaric egressive sounds, ie reverse clicks;
one or two apicovelars; nareal fricatives; and a few others).=20

[snip]
> >> OTHERS
> >> (voiceless) "h"; raspy and unraspy, and voiced and unvoiced velar
> fricatives
> >> (that's 4 sounds);


> >
> >The raspy/nonraspy distinction would be challenging to notate.

>=20
> Not really=97see below.
>=20
> >>"extreme retroflex" voiceless and voiced fricatives (that's
> >> 2); English stlye s, z, voiced th, unvoiced th; and two others whose
> >> identification I am very unsure of=97I can pronounce one of them=97I=
called
> them
> >> voiced and unvoiced "lateral fricatives", thoguh I'm not sure tha
> >
> >Seems something was lost here(?). I have found laterals (fricative or
> >otherwise)
> >are very easy to produce both ingressively & egressively. The sibilant=
s
> >/s, z/
> >are more difficult, as they sound quite different when pronounced
> >ingressively,
> >unlike most other fricatives (due to the obstruction of the teeth,
> >tongue shape,
> >etc.)
>=20
> You're right, the s and z do sound very different, but that's what they=
are.
> And I'm sure that the other 2 letters are not laterals=97I never should=
have
> called then that in the first place. I guess they're kind of like the =
s and z
> except that
> more of

Are your 'laterals' perhaps the ingressive versions of /sh, zh/ sounds?
These might sound rather lateral ingressively.

> >> bove down (not on computer!) as n, m, r, x, g, h, q, s, z,

> >> t, d, and l with various diacritical marks stuck on them.
> >

> >I would be interested to know what system of diacritics you have tried
> >for these.
>=20
> With m, n and r, I used them plain, and with a tilde, circumflex, and a=
n
> upside-down circumflex (wedge? I always forget their names) to represen=
t the 8
> nasals and 4 r's, with the plain version of each of them sounding the s=
ame as
> in English. H, s, and z are the same. I used an l for what I thought =
was a
> voiceless lateral, and a slashed l for its voiced version. T and d rep=
resent
> the voiceless and voiced dental fricatives (though actually, in some di=
alects
> they are the same sounds as in English, alveolar plosives). Then there=
's a q
> for the "apicovelar" voiceless fricative and a q with a tilde for it's =
voiced
> counterpart. And finally, x represents the velar voiceless fricative (=
not
> raspy) and g the voiced velar fricative (not raspy), while a tilde over=
each
> of them indicates raspiness.

I like this solution - it would work fine in writing, & is doable
on computer (with a bit of work), altho' most formats wouldn't support
these characters...which is a big pain.

>=20
> >They could be represented using either X-Sampa or another ASCII-IPA
> >format,
>=20
> I'm not familiar with either of those.

Two variations on adapting the International Phonetic Alphabet for use
on the net, generally by a series of conventions to represent the
diacritics & letters of the IPA using standard ASCII characters.
I don't have a reference handy, but several people have links to
one or more of these on their websites.

>=20
> >[snip vowel descriptions]
> >This does represent a bit of a problem - certainly, if the tones were
> >regarded as
> >thirteen steps within a speaker-relative octave (or perhaps an octave
> >and a half?)


> >then they could be equated to musical notes.

>=20
> Well, I should have been clearer about that=97there are six levels, or =
notes,
> and the rest are different combinations of them. But 1-13 still works =
fine.
>=20

With 6 levels, and combinations thereof, it might be possible to=20
indicate these using simple diacritics (again, not an entirely
satisfactory solution...) Tone could be placed above the vowel,
length below the vowel...

> > Hmm - an ingressively sung
> >language -
> >now that _is_ a wild idea! You could notate it with a three tier syste=
m:
> >the
> >phonemic string, a scalar tier to denote tone, and a third tier to
> >denote the length


> >perhaps using musical notation or numbers to indicate duration.

> >[Length] 3 2 7
> >[Tone] 3 5 11
> >[Phone] ho xan r=E4q


> >Admittedly this is rather clumsy, but would get the idea across.

>=20
> Right and right.
>=20
> >Or perhaps notate the tone as a numerical index either before or after
> >the given
> ne does not change):
> >3ho5xan 11r=E4q ~ ho3xan5 r=E4q11
> >Although I admit, I am not sure how to denote length - reduplication o=
f
> >vowels
> >would create some monstrosities:
> >hooo3xaan5 r=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4q11
>=20


> Yes, I've tried that, and it gets even worse:

> giiiiiiiiiiiii1q[tilde]eeee13m[circumflex]=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=E4=
=E4=E4=E44
> which means: I might go today.


> In the new alphabet that word is 9 letters

>=20
[snip]
>=20
> >If I come up with any other ideas, I will forward them to you.
> >Regards,
> >Bfool Wxouzwx
>=20
> Thank you. (what is Bfool Wxouzwx? I know it's not your name)

It's the Livagian spelling for Paul Roser. I'm still working on
how to spell it in Tsxaah (my own artlang).

Regards,
Bfool


Fuscian

unread,
Jan 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/8/98
to

In a message dated 1/7/1998 8:08:34 PM, you wrote:

>> Well I'd love to put all my languages on the web, but I can't deal with
HTML
>> and I'm having other kinds of problems with wysiwyg [sp?] programs. One
>> crashes when I'm using it and with the other, my modem shuts off before I
can
>> finish downloading it. I may just have to get Adobe Pagemill soon.
>
>Why can't you deal with HTML? Is it because of AOL's weird
>antics?
>
>Tal.

Well, all right. It's that I *can't* deal with HTML so much as I don't *want*
to deal with it. I hate it like I hate Latin and Windows (and DOS [and Bill
Gates]).

JTR


Fuscian

unread,
Jan 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/11/98
to

In a message dated 1/7/1998 9:18:28 PM, you wrote:=0A=0A>> >Your 'extreme=
retroflex' is something that I refer to as apicovelar,=0A>> >something t=
hat=0A>> >occurs in the Tsxaani liturgical language,=0A>> =0A>> Where is =
(was) that spoken?=0A>=0A>It is my artlang,=0A=0AOh! I thought it might =
be a natlang, since you said you didn't know some=0Astuff about it.=0A=0A=
> spoken on an archipelago in the mid-Atlantic, =0A>somewhat south of the=
Azores and northwest of Madeira. The =0A>liturgical language has a numbe=
r of _very_ exotic sounds, partly=0A>to indicate that it is not the norma=
l language of the street (these=0A>sounds include several velaric egressi=
ve sounds, ie reverse clicks;=0A>one or two apicovelars; nareal fricative=
s; and a few others). =0A=0AI'm afraid to ask what nareal is.=0A=0A[snip,=
snip]=0A=0A>Are your 'laterals' perhaps the ingressive versions of /sh, =
zh/ sounds?=0A>These might sound rather lateral ingressively.=0A=0ANope. =
The tongue is pretty parallel to the roof of the mouth in this sound.=0A=
=0A[snipetty snip]=0A=0A>I like this solution - it would work fine in wri=
ting, & is doable=0A>on computer (with a bit of work), altho' most format=
s wouldn't support=0A>these characters...which is a big pain.=0A=0AExactl=
y=0A=0A>> >They could be represented using either X-Sampa or another ASCI=
I-IPA=0A>> >format,=0A>> =0A>> I'm not familiar with either of those.=0A>=
=0A>Two variations on adapting the International Phonetic Alphabet for us=
e=0A>on the net, generally by a series of conventions to represent th=0A>=
diacritics & letters of the IPA using standard ASCII characters.=0A=0AOh.=
=0A=0A>I don't have a reference handy, but several people have links to=
=0A>one or more of these on their websites.=0A>=0A>> =0A>> >[snip vowel d=
escriptions]=0A>> >This does represent a bit of a problem - certainly, if=
the tones wer=0A>> >regarded as=0A>> >thirteen steps within a speaker-re=
lative octave (or perhaps an octave=0A>> >and a half?)=0A>> >then they co=
uld be equated to musical notes.=0A>> =0A>> Well, I should have been clea=
rer about that=97there are six levels, or notes,=0A>> and the rest are di=
fferent combinations of them. But 1-13 still works=0Afine.=0A>> =0A>=0A>=
With 6 levels, and combinations thereof, it might be possible to =0A>indi=
cate these using simple diacritics (again, not an entirely=0A>satisfactor=
y solution...) Tone could be placed above the vowel,=0A>length below the =
vowel...=0A=0AI'll think about that one.=0A=0AHere's some more tone info =
(this is for the main dialect anyway, it changes in=0Asome others).=0A=0A=
The six notes are the first six notes of the c minor scale: c, d, e flat=
, f,=0Ag, a flat.=0AI'll represent them with 1-6.=0AThe thirteen tones ar=
e:=0A1=0A2=0A3=0A4=0A5=0A6=0A2-1=0A3-1=0A4-1=0A5-1=0A6-1=0A6-4=0A4-3-2-1-=
3-2=0A=0AYou start counting for vowel length on the last note of multi-no=
te vowels.=0A=0A>> >Regards,=0A>> >Bfool Wxouzwx=0A>> =0A>> Thank you. (=
what is Bfool Wxouzwx? I know it's not your name)=0A>=0A>It's the Livagi=
an spelling for Paul Roser. I'm still working on=0A>how to spell it in Ts=
xaah (my own artlang).=0A=0AI suspected it might be some kind of translit=
eration thing.=0A=0A>Regards,=0A>Bfool=0A=0A=0AJTR=0A=0AP.S.-I tried to l=
ook "nareal" up, but it wasn't in the dictionary.=0A


Paul Roser

unread,
Jan 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/11/98
to

> P.S.-I tried to look "nareal" up, but it wasn't in the dictionary.

Nareal peratains to the nares, ie. the nostrils - a nareal fricative
is one that involves friction there, especially associated with a
voiceless nasal (but may co-occur with other sounds).

Bfool


Pytr Klark

unread,
Jan 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/12/98
to
Uh...is this even humanly possible? I mean, I understand
nasalized fricatives, but actually making fricatives with the nostrils!?
My nose isn't that versatile.
:Peter

_____ _______________________________________________________
| \ O) Human speech is like a cracked kettle on which we )
_|__/ | tap crude rhythms for bears to dance to, while we |
/ |eter | long to make music that will melt the stars. |
| | | - Gustave Flaubert, "Madame Bovary" |
\___lark (_______________________________________________________(O


Fuscian

unread,
Jan 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/12/98
to

In a message dated 1/11/1998 11:06:40 PM, you wrote:

>> > P.S.-I tried to look "nareal" up, but it wasn't in the dictionary.
>>
>> Nareal peratains to the nares, ie. the nostrils - a nareal fricative
>> is one that involves friction there, especially associated with a
>> voiceless nasal (but may co-occur with other sounds).
>> Bfool
> Uh...is this even humanly possible? I mean, I understand
>nasalized fricatives, but actually making fricatives with the nostrils!?
>My nose isn't that versatile.
> :Peter

I'm trying to do it now. I think I can kinda get it........
I think it's easier to do without any other sounds at the same time, with the
mouth closed, and voiced, so maybe I don't get it.

JTR


And Rosta

unread,
Jan 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/12/98
to

> > > P.S.-I tried to look "nareal" up, but it wasn't in the dictionary.
> >
> > Nareal peratains to the nares, ie. the nostrils - a nareal fricative
> > is one that involves friction there, especially associated with a
> > voiceless nasal (but may co-occur with other sounds).
> > Bfool
> Uh...is this even humanly possible? I mean, I understand
> nasalized fricatives, but actually making fricatives with the nostrils!?
> My nose isn't that versatile.
> :Peter

Just blow hard. The amount of airstream turbulence increases not only
with narrowing of the aperture but also with increase in air flow.
It's all to do with some elementary principle of aerodynamics or
other.

Anyway, if you can hear the air coming out your nose when you
breathe, or try to dislodge a bit of snot, or whatever, then you can
hear yourself doing a nareal fricative.

For me at least, a [m] with nareal frication (a) signifies (simulated)
orgastic pleasure, and (b) tickles.

--co`o, mi`e la`o and


B Philip Jonsson

unread,
Jan 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/12/98
to

> In a message dated 1/11/1998 11:06:40 PM, you wrote:
>
> >> > P.S.-I tried to look "nareal" up, but it wasn't in the dictionary.
> >>
> >> Nareal peratains to the nares, ie. the nostrils - a nareal fricative
> >> is one that involves friction there, especially associated with a
> >> voiceless nasal (but may co-occur with other sounds).
> >> Bfool
> > Uh...is this even humanly possible? I mean, I understand
> >nasalized fricatives, but actually making fricatives with the nostrils!?
> >My nose isn't that versatile.
> > :Peter
>
> I'm trying to do it now. I think I can kinda get it........
> I think it's easier to do without any other sounds at the same time, with the
> mouth closed, and voiced, so maybe I don't get it.
>
> JTR

Really guys! A _voiceless_ nareal fricative isn't that difficult.
Basically a sneeze!

BTW: I can even make a quadrulabial click! (I need a bit of help from my
wife though.) One of the funniest uses of Latinate phonetic terminology is
the fact that you can use it to describe all manner of non-linguistic
noises made in the vocal tract, and some made elsewhere. It didn't take
too many bottles at the linguistic institute students' party for some
freshman to remark that tremulants can be produced at the other end of the
body...


And Rosta

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

> >For me at least, a [m] with nareal frication (a) signifies (simulated)
> >orgastic pleasure, and (b) tickles.
> >
> Ne mi wo insl, y ba hao stop ken hef ea de kam awta eni wa .
> Not that I want to insult you but how a stop can have air
> coming out anywhere .
> A stop is something where no air comes out till it is released .
> Maybe when it is released .
> Ken a ve de is awt le .

Please feel free to insult me, Da. (But not my sovereign, Her Majesty
the Queen.)
I believe that during the production of [m] air flows out of the nose.
You can verify this by timing how long a [m] you can do normally and
then with your nostrils pinched shut.

--and


Fuscian

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Exactly. Farting may be a sound but it smells bad. We could also have a
language with sounds that including different methods of spitting, but it's
messy. We could have a language (as pkroser does) that includes (unless your
nose happens to be remarkably empty at the moment) flinging snot across the
room, but that's messy too. The line should be drawn somewhere, I believe,
preferrably at the point where making the sound also forces some type of
disliked substance, whether it be liquid, solid, or gas, to be ejected from
the body (unless, of course, the language was not designed to be spoken by
humans, but some alien creatures to whom the objectional materials coming out
of the body thing would not apply). In addition, all three of the sounds
mentioned above could be at times impossible or difficult to make, depending
on the abundance or lack of the substance in question.

JTR


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages