[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 46 KB, 1693x523, cherkess.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14192573 No.14192573 [Reply] [Original]

I'm not sure if this is the right board, but I'd like to ask if there is a possibility of English phonology being misanalyzed,with English actually having many consonants and only few vowels, like Cherkess, for example?

It has an odd vowel system with great many glides and di/triphthongs, something common for the surface vowels in consonant heavy langauges, but uncommon otherwise.

The vowels are highly unstable, with vastly different pronunciations in different dialects, which are not only easily mutually comprehensible, but the difference is perceived merely as an" accent", suggesting the vowels are indeed more prosodic than actually phonemic.

Even native speakers cannot syllabify words easily, unlike most langauges where native speakers perceive the syllables as obvious and unambiguous, while in English it seems as if the consonants were the nuclei (nucleuses?), instead fo the vowels.

The perception of native speakers themselves that consonants are far more important than vowels.

It seems that I sound more native and natural when I concentrate on the consonants and mostly ignore the vowels.

What do you think about this?

>> No.14193979

bump

>> No.14194274

>>14192573
It's definetly interesting, but unfortunately I can't add to the discussion.

>> No.14194289
File: 124 KB, 882x731, apu_sherlock.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14194289

>>14194274
same, bumping for interest

>> No.14194321

>>14192573
Just spitballing, but would it have anything to with 60% of it's vocab being Latin/French? Does the Germanic component of it yeild the same results?

>> No.14195538

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvoKewWI_3s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOlmCCwnWj0

The sound of west and East Cherkess for reference. Both are believed to have only three phonemic vowels, /ə/, /a/ and /aː/.

>> No.14195592
File: 8 KB, 536x367, quikscript.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14195592

>>14192573
depending on who you ask, english has around 40 unique phonemes, roughly 15 of which are vowels.
A handful of those vowels are very commonly modified with y and r sounds.
Like you say, slight differences in vowel sounds are often chalked up to "accent".
It is interesting that meaning seems more concentrated in consonants, since this is a feature shared by some very ancient mesopotamian and egyptian languages.

if there's a point to be made here, somebody else is going to have to make it for me

>> No.14195787

Abkhaz and the extinct Ubykh, two phonemic vowels, those in my opinion seem to have most English-like sounding vowels:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOAnumDL3sk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vidSM6wfLoU

Marshallese, another language with few vowels (four or three, depending on who you ask), but many consonants. It seems four vowels are too many, and it doesn't sound in any way close to what English sounds like. (while the two vowel systems above sound very close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VziOp3PgBDs

>>14195592
My point is there might actually be fewer vowels than those 15 (or more), but substantially more consonants, like in the langauges above. Many vowel sounds can still be heard, but those result from the influence of the surrounding consonants on the few actually phonemic vowels.