Re: Universally Pronounceable Phonology

li [Logan Kearsley] mi tulis la ...

> I don't typically go in for auxlangs, but I've started helping out with
a 
> small group project, and I'm trying to design a phonological system
that's 
> as close to universally pronounceable as possible.
> 
> I've started out by eliminating any consonant distinctions based on
voicing 
> or aspiration, and putting together a lot of allophones. After taking
out 
> some other possible noises that are missing from any of the various 
> languages I have appropriate knowledge of, I've got a list of 7 1/2 
> consonants:
> b- labial plosive
> d- alveolarplosive
> g- glottal plosive
>  j- postalveolar fricative
> v- labiodental fricative
> z- alveolar fricative
> n- nasal
> r- any of r, r\, r`, r\`, l, l`, or l\ (counted half at the moment
because 
> r's and l's can be syllabic)
> 
> How does that look so far? Would it be a really good idea to make 'r'
firmly 
> consonantal, or is it OK to let it be syllabic? Anything that I should
take 
> away or add?


Okay, I'll throw in my 2c.

V and B are confused by many, as in Spanish or many Austronesian
languages.  V may also be confused with [w] (assuming you are
going to have it as a prevocalic alternative to /u/).  You may
want to consider eliminating V altogether unless there is some
other need to include it.

If L & R are not going to be distinguished, I'd recommend
standardizing on a rhotic of the Japanese variety.


-------------------------------------------------
deinx nxtxr

LI SASXSEK LATIS. (http://www.nutter.net/sasxsek)