- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Transliteration and interpretation issues
- Transliteration and interpretation issues
-
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
DONJCH > 14-05-2020, 05:07 PM
Spoken English can have as many vowels as you like. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
DonaldFisk > 14-05-2020, 10:02 PM
(14-05-2020, 03:46 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(14-05-2020, 06:27 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Note that Dutch allows from 1-4 e's in a row
Four e's in a row?
Dutch beats Russian, we have only three to my knowledge. But Russian can have six consonants in a row, and that word is anecdotic.
German is the consonants champion, with such words as Schmetterlingsschwimmen.
Georgian would like a word with you: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
Anton > 14-05-2020, 10:43 PM
Amazing! I had some Georgian schoolmates, but I'm zero in Georgian. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
-JKP- > 14-05-2020, 11:09 PM
(14-05-2020, 10:02 PM)DonaldFisk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view....
Georgian would like a word with you: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Czech has some words similar to that. Maybe not quite to that extent (I haven't seen enough Czech words to know), but whenever I see words like čtvrť, I wonder to myself if these are resonances of bygone abjads. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
ReneZ > 15-05-2020, 08:18 AM
(14-05-2020, 11:09 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.words like čtvrť, I wonder to myself if these are resonances of bygone abjads
I doubt it, because abjads are an aspect of writing, not of spoken language.
I once heard, but Koen is the expert who can confirm/reject, that vowels are "recent" developments of human speech capabilities, and primitive languages did not have them. This would be leftovers of that, or more accurately, the sounds of "l" and "r" were originally equivalent to vowels. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
-JKP- > 15-05-2020, 08:32 AM
ReneZ Wrote:I once heard, but Koen is the expert who can confirm/reject, that vowels are "recent" developments of human speech capabilities, and primitive languages did not have them. This would be leftovers of that, or more accurately, the sounds of "l" and "r" were originally equivalent to vowels.
So in the past, babies said "mmmmmmmmmmm" rather than "mama" or "ah ah"? -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
Koen G > 15-05-2020, 11:24 AM
(15-05-2020, 08:18 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I once heard, but Koen is the expert who can confirm/reject, that vowels are "recent" developments of human speech capabilities, and primitive languages did not have them. This would be leftovers of that, or more accurately, the sounds of "l" and "r" were originally equivalent to vowels.
These are syllabic consonants: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Some consonant clearly have more body to them than others. A common example I remember is the British English pronunciation "bottle", which has what sounds like a really thick "l" as the second syllable. In English, as opposed to Czech, this is not immediately obvious in writing.
I would be careful connecting any hypothesized or reconstructed features of early language to properties of modern languages. We can reconstruct up to proto-Indo-European with some accuracy, but this is still a modern language, part of the top of the pyramid. The kinds of hypotheses you are talking about are situated at the bottom of the pyramid, and we know absolutely nothing about everything that's in between.
The best way of thinking about what is actually happening is to see consonants as a scale, some consonants are more vowel-like than others. Take the example of our "l": it is voiced (i.e. when you pronounce it, your vocal cords vibrate) and you can lengthen it at will, both properties of vowels. What distinguishes it from a full vowel is that the air does not move "relatively unhindered" through the mouth. But the sound can perfectly end up taking the role of a vowel in syllables. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
Torsten > 15-05-2020, 11:49 AM
(15-05-2020, 08:18 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I once heard, but Koen is the expert who can confirm/reject, that vowels are "recent" developments of human speech capabilities, and primitive languages did not have them.
There is no such thing as primitive languages. See You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
The idea that vowels are a recent development is simply wrong. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
ReneZ > 15-05-2020, 12:07 PM
I should have written proto- rather than primitive.
And thanks to Koen for clarifying. -
RE: Transliteration and interpretation issues
-JKP- > 15-05-2020, 12:29 PM
I wasn't trying to imply that primitive languages didn't have vowels.
I was wondering whether written Czech had some influence from nearby abjadic languages sometime in the past (I wasn't thinking the very distant past, but before the medieval period).
There are many Czech words that don't have vowels in places where English writers would expect to see them.