Sound Change Quickie Thread

[Man in Space]

I found a book preview on Google Books that mentions some connections between /s/ and palatals in passing. Apparently some languages in South America even have [s] as an allophone of /j/, although the preview doesn't include the name of the reference for this.

If you're of the persuasion that the PIE palatals were actual palatals, Proto-Slavic developed some instances of *s *z from the palatal series, IIRC.

[missals]

Oh, yeah, and Ligurian and some other Gallo-Italic varieties developed /s z/ from /tʃ dʒ/ (thus Ligurian Zêna 'Genoa') - with some instances of the latter, at least, of course developing from Latin /j/.

[malloc]

Another issue has been resolving hiatus through vowel coalescence. Apart from glide formation in particular cases, the current rule fuses the height (high or non-high) of the first vowel with the front and round feature (or absence of either for /a/) of the second vowel into one long vowel. Thus the sequence /a.i/ yields [e:], /eu/ yields [o:], /ie/ yields [i:], /oa/ yields [a:] and so forth. However, I know little about how vowels tend to coalesce across languages, apart from the frequent /ai au/ > /e o/.

[dɮ the phoneme]

Is a merger of /f/ and /x/, without debuccalization to [h], plausible? What would they merge to?

[missals]

Another issue has been resolving hiatus through vowel coalescence. Apart from glide formation in particular cases, the current rule fuses the height (high or non-high) of the first vowel with the front and round feature (or absence of either for /a/) of the second vowel into one long vowel. Thus the sequence /a.i/ yields [e:], /eu/ yields [o:], /ie/ yields [i:], /oa/ yields [a:] and so forth. However, I know little about how vowels tend to coalesce across languages, apart from the frequent /ai au/ > /e o/.

All of that is definitely normal. So would /i.a/ result in [ɯː] (or [ɨː]), since the output would be high but neither front nor rounded?

Is a merger of /f/ and /x/, without debuccalization to [h], plausible? What would they merge to?

Hmm, honestly, if you're trying to avoid /f/ and /x/ merging with an already-existent /h/, I don't think you're going to have much luck. A merger of /f/ and /x/ is very likely to result in at least a partial merger with /h/ somewhere.

I could see, perhaps, f > ɸ, and then both [ɸ] and [x] becoming [ɸ] in rounded or labial contexts, [ç] in front contexts, and [x] otherwise. But I think merger with /h/ somewhere would still be more likely.

[malloc]

All of that is definitely normal. So would /i.a/ result in [ɯː] (or [ɨː]), since the output would be high but neither front nor rounded?

Well, high vowels become glides unless the following vowel has the same front or rounding features, so /ia/ would yield [ja] instead. Although admittedly, I am not totally satisfied with the handling of hiatus resolution so far. It seems difficult to balance considerations of theoretical elegance and intuitive ease. The currently described rule makes sense in the abstract but yields some complicated results.

Is a merger of /f/ and /x/, without debuccalization to [h], plausible? What would they merge to?

From what I understand, English turned some instances of /x/ into /f/ at some point. The final <gh> in <tough> originally signified a velar fricative for instance.

[KathTheDragon]

It was an irregular development of word-final /x/ after rounded vowels, whereby it labialised to /xʷ/ and then to /f/, instead of regularly being lost following glide epenthesis.

[bbbosborne]

is pʔV tʔV kʔV etc... --> p'V t'V k'V etc... plausible?

also, are there any instances of click phonemes merging/diverging?

[Dē Graut Bʉr]

is pʔV tʔV kʔV etc... --> p'V t'V k'V etc... plausible?

Yes.

[Man in Space]

also, are there any instances of click phonemes merging/diverging?

Yes.

[Aftovota]

Is a merger of /f/ and /x/, without debuccalization to [h], plausible? What would they merge to?

/f/ merging to /x/ happened in Dutch.

And a board favorite, Iau, has [x] as an allophone of /f/.

[bbbosborne]

can breathy voiced plosives turn into implosives, e.g. /bʱ/ --> /ɓ/?

[Man in Space]

can breathy voiced plosives turn into implosives, e.g. /bʱ/ --> /ɓ/?

I'm not aware of any sound change where this has happened. That being said, the combination of voicing and the glottal mechanism would make me think that you could realistically get away with it.

[Nortaneous]

Voiced plosives can turn into implosives. Voiceless plosives can also turn into implosives. But breathy-voiced plosives probably can't.

[dɮ the phoneme]

Voiceless plosives can also turn into implosives.

I've never seen this before; in which language(s)?

[Vijay]

Voiceless plosives can also turn into implosives.

I've never seen this before; in which language(s)?

Khmer? Vietnamese? Sindhi?

[bbbosborne]

why am i receiving notifications for non-existent replies?

[Vijay]

Yeah, I got one, too...no idea why.

[Ahzoh]

How might I get this vowel inventory:
/a e ẽː i o õː u/
/ʲa ʲe ʲẽː ʲi ʲo ʲõː ʲu/
/ai̯ ei̯ ẽi̯ oi̯ õi̯/
/ʲai̯ ʲei̯ ʲẽi̯ ʲoi̯ ʲõi̯/

From this?:
/a e ø ɤ o/
/aː eː øː ɤː oː/

Provided that this occurs:
V[+front][-rounded] > C[+palatalized]V[+front][-rounded]
V[+front][+rounded] > C[+palatalized]V[-front][+rounded]
V[-front][-rounded] > V[+front][-rounded]
V[-front][+rounded] > V[-front][+rounded]

[mèþru]

1. Mid vowels become high when there is no coda
2. Vowels nasalise before nasals regardless of whether they are in the same syllable.
3. Umlaut causing /e ø ɤ o a / > /i y ɯ u e/
4. All long vowels become diphthongs except /iː yː/
5. /iː ĩː yː ỹː ɯi̯ ɯ̃i̯ ui̯ ũi̯/ >/i ĩ y ỹ i ĩ y ỹ/
6. your rules on fronting and rounding
7. /ĩ ã/> /ẽ/, /ũ/ > /õ/, /ãi̯/ >/ẽi̯/
8. /ẽn õn/ > /ẽː õː/
9. /ẽ/ > /ẽː/