for any who can answer, question # 2

topic posted Sun, January 16, 2005 - 2:39 PM by  offlineHolden S.
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
has any linguist ever made a comrehensive inventory of the sounds common to ALL human languages?
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

    Sun, January 16, 2005 - 5:09 PM
    Since a great many human languages have not been recorded in any way, I'd have to say no. There is a popular book by Peter Ladefoged and Ian Maddieson called the Sounds of the World's Languages that goes a long way to describe all the sounds we know of.
  • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

    Sun, January 16, 2005 - 8:31 PM
    This is not as simple a question as it sounds. Well, first of all, the question itself is ambiguous -- "comprehensive inventory" sounds like you mean all sounds that occur anywhere, whereas "common to ALL human languages" sounds like you mean those sounds that occur in every known language.

    In order to address the questions, but especially the first one, you would have to take into account the difference between phones and phonemes. Counting the number of phones (sounds) in languages, including all their dialects, would be like counting the number of fractions between 1 and 2. Phonemes, OTOH, are like the boundaries that a language draws between sounds. For example, the queen of England's pronounciation of the vowel sound in "know," the way an Australian does and the way I do would all be different phones. But those sounds are a single phoneme in English, because all English speakers would regard these sounds as variations of the same vowel. The vowel sounds in feet and fit can both be found in Spanish, but in Spanish they are a single phoneme; a Spanish speaker would regard those as variations of the same vowel sound. The test is that switching between one and the other would not cause a word's meaning to change. But in English, those are separate phonemes; sin and seen are distinct words. An English speaker is likely to consider the initial sounds of call and kill as the same phoneme, but an Arabic or Quechua speaker would hear them as distinct sounds. And so on.

    Some languages of the Caucasus divide the voiceless velar fricative (German ch sound) into five different phonemes, depending on how far back in the mouth it is pronounced. But as you can guess, there are potentially unlimited potential fine divisions that could be made in that one sound, even though there are practical limits on the fineness of phonemic divisions humans can handle in their language.

    But for practical purposes, if you can find a complete version of the IPA, it can give a general idea of the phonetic range of human languages, including things like tones, clicks and plosives.

    Now, if your question is about what sounds are common to all human languages -- the Hawaiian language has the smallest phonemic inventory known, so let's look at that. Subtract the glottal stop, first of all, which is not found phonemically in English (or any European language, to my knowledge). Are the rest of the sounds are common to nearly all languages? Well, l/r is lacking in some, so subtract that. One would think that m would be universal, but the Iroquoian languages lack labials, so that gets rid of m, and p too. Tahitian lacks a velar stop (k sound) and a sibilant (s/sh/z/zh). What are we left with. Maybe n and t are common to all languages in some form. Maybe not. I don't know any language with fewer than three vowel phonemes (a/i/u). But there may be some.
    • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

      Mon, January 17, 2005 - 5:32 AM
      where on the map do we find implosives?
      • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

        Mon, January 17, 2005 - 9:07 PM
        Implosives are mainly found in African and Native American languages, but they're also in a few other places, like Vietnam and India (Sindhi).
        • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

          Mon, January 17, 2005 - 9:49 PM
          how do they fit into the "history" of language?
          I'm familiar with the Sindhi implosive.
          • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

            Tue, January 18, 2005 - 11:15 AM
            IMplosives are unique to the Khoisan languages of southern Africa and to Bantu languages that have been influenced by them, like Xhosa and Zulu. (Sindhi?)

            "Plosives" is the word now more in fashion for what used to be called "glottalized" consonants. They are especially common in languages of the Pacific Northwest, and also found in Quechua (from Cuzco south) and Aymara.

            As the names imply, the difference between a palatal/velar click and a glottalized k or q is whether the air is going inward or outward.

            As far as implosives, aka clicks -- since the Khoisan-speaking peoples (aka Bushmen) have been determined by DNA studies to be the ancestral people of everyone else on earth, there is a hypothesis that clicks are original to human language and have been lost by everyone else. But no way to prove that.
            • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

              Tue, January 18, 2005 - 11:21 AM
              I've heard Sindhi spoken and didn't notice plosives in it (either glottalized consonants or click sounds). Linguistics books (as well as my academic advisor, a specialist in African languages) always say that clicks are unique to southern Africa. Can you provide more info on Sindhi phonetics? I have a hunch that by "implosives" you may be referring to glottalized consonants.
              • Unsu...
                 

                Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

                Tue, January 18, 2005 - 12:49 PM
                i think there's some confusion caused by terminology here.

                besides the pulmonic egressives that we're all familiar with if we're english speakers, there are (at least) three other airflow types used in natural language. i learned to call them implosives, ejectives and clicks.

                implosives are similar to clicks in that they're both ingressive - involve airflow into the body. ejectives and pulmonic egressives involve forcing air out the body.

                implosives are different from clicks in the location of closure. in clicks, closure is at the velum. in implosives, closure is at the larynx. it gives the sounds a totally different character. as implosives are released into the sounds that follow, the glottis is simultaneously opened and lowered, giving rise to something that sounds like a little moan. clicks don't involve the glottis at all.

                clicks are, i'm told, restricted to a southern africa. ejectives are present in the pacific northwest and other places. i assume hen is right about implosives.
                • Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

                  Tue, January 18, 2005 - 1:19 PM
                  "implosives are different from clicks in the location of closure."

                  Hm, this is not what I learned from my professor who specialized in African languages. He talked about languages with as many as 15 or 20 clicks, located everywhere from the velum to the tongue tip and lips.

                  But, as you say, I'm probably mixed up on my terminology. I grew up calling the glottalized consonants of my Native land "glottalized," and a lot of Natives still do, and now there is supposed to be some other term. And now my linguistics books are all put away...

                  "in implosives, closure is at the larynx. it gives the sounds a totally different character. as implosives are released into the sounds that follow, the glottis is simultaneously opened and lowered, giving rise to something that sounds like a little moan. "

                  I'm trying to imagine what this is like, or produce the sound as described, and it just seems to come out like a gasp.

                  I guess some things are just hard to describe in print, they just have to be demonstrated.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Unsu...
                     

                    Re: for any who can answer, question # 2

                    Sat, January 22, 2005 - 2:58 PM
                    "Hm, this is not what I learned from my professor who specialized in African languages. He talked about languages with as many as 15 or 20 clicks, located everywhere from the velum to the tongue tip and lips. "

                    i think you're describing the place of articulation, as opposed to the place of closure. in clicks the back of the tongue creates a closure at the velum. what you do with the rest of your tongue (or lips) determines the place of articulation of the click. i can get velar clicks by making the closure at the uvula, which is, i imagine, how you can get a velar click.

                    implosives have closure at the glottis, just like ejectives, which is what i think you're calling "glottalized".

Recent topics in "Linguistics"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
What is Skinner actually saying? Orangeboxman 0 October 29, 2009
OT: New Tribe Unsubscribed 0 April 19, 2009
anlaysing conversation esta 4 April 19, 2009
"Hamas", in Spanish ("never, never again"); in Zionazzi ("ham-... Michael 15 January 4, 2009