Zompist Bboard Again

Just decompose them to a semivowel and a nasal? Nʲ Nʷ → jN wN / V_#
Or if you're feeling rather more rebellious: Nʲ Nʷ → Ni Nu / _#

AI is now taking linguists' jobs, too! A computer science student has managed to decipher the first word on an ancient Roman scroll carbonized by a Mount Vesuvius eruption – with the help of artificial intelligence. For his achievement, the student, 21-year-old Luke Farritor, has won $40,000. But h...

AI is now taking linguists' jobs, too! A computer science student has managed to decipher the first word on an ancient Roman scroll carbonized by a Mount Vesuvius eruption – with the help of artificial intelligence. For his achievement, the student, 21-year-old Luke Farritor, has won $40,000. But he...

Right, that makes sense as to how /jn̩/ would be realised. I was curious to see a spectrogram of it.

Hey zompist, sorry for keeping nagging you, but which one of these is close enough to your idiolect? Maybe e.g. the one by ausg? And is it just me, or does ynarakit pronounce onion as [ɐnjɛ]?

I can't give you references since my PC has died and I am on my phone now, but the Nostraticist literature is full of such comparisons between IE and Afroasiatic. I may be mistaken, but I think I recall hearing it from somewhere rather more reputable - akin to the comparisons of PIE and AA words fo...

Do you mean there plenty other [jn̩]s specifically, or just plenty coda [jn]s?

[ˈʌn.jn̩]. "Nation" and "onion" end in the same sound. ([n̩], I mean— the [j] is just in onion.) I got what the transcription would be, but what does it sound like? How acoustically distinct is it from [ˈʌn.jən]? Is it really two syllables, or just [ʌnjn]? Two syllables. It's no...

I keep getting errors 500 and 404... send help!

Now I wanna hear a recording of 'onion' pronounced with a syllabic [n̩]. ([ˈʌn.jn̩]?.. [ˈʌn.n̩]??) [ˈʌn.jn̩]. "Nation" and "onion" end in the same sound. ([n̩], I mean— the [j] is just in onion.) I got what the transcription would be, but what does it sound like? How acousticall...

Now I wanna hear a recording of 'onion' pronounced with a syllabic [n̩]. ([ˈʌn.jn̩]?.. [ˈʌn.n̩]??)

So here's an interesting pair of sentences: "You don't kiss like him." "He doesn't kiss like you." Formally, these should be equivalent: You and him both kiss differently. But without further context, the former strongly implies "He kisses better than you" and the latt...

I vaguely recall that someone over here mentioned how PIE *septm '7' has been compared to Egyptian sfḫt '7.FEM', but does anyone happen to know of a source that discusses this? My searches turned up nothing, and I also have some recollection that there was some Egyptian suffix with -m.

Cross-posting from the Linguistic Miscellany Thread: Per A grammar and dictionary of Gayogo̱hó:nǫˀ (Cayuga) : SR – as in w ę hnihSRí:yo: ‘nice day’ – sounds like the SHR [ʃɹ] in shrink . Some speakers pronounce SR as FR [fɹ] instead, for example in words like ganǫ́hkwasraˀ (ganǫ́hkwaFRaˀ) ‘love’. S...

That's right, /kæsænmnnnn/ and /mɔkptspk/ are permitted, but /klæ/ is right out!

So what you're saying is that syllable structure has no class?

*ducks to avoid thrown tomatoes*

This is not a problem from a century ago. For a pretty modern analysis, see Emily Willingham's Phallacy . The idea that no more biases or problems exist is naive. Oh come on now. This is a borderline strawman argument. I've never claimed that no more biases or problems exist. This is what you wrote...

I'm arguing that a bunch of ignorant and/or racist papers of a century ago do not constitute a separate, new "instance of science". This is not a problem from a century ago. For a pretty modern analysis, see Emily Willingham's Phallacy . The idea that no more biases or problems exist is n...

Besides, I've got the impression that the latest rounds of disagreements here is more about terminology than substance. So do I, and I'm trying my best to assert that false beliefs of yesteryear aren't science. Is a specific scientific claim "a science"? Does anyone really interpret "...

I'm arguing that a bunch of ignorant and/or racist papers of a century ago do not constitute a separate, new "instance of science". Science isn't dogma, it isn't what is currently held to be true. Science is about the scientific method, about the way to conduct it. Of which we have devised...