Re: [tied] Re: ka and k^a

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob" <magwich78@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 1:05 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: ka and k^a


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> wrote:
>
> > > In that case, it seems best to make the deduction that, based on
> > > what we know (the simplest vowel inventory distinguishing height
> > > but not frontness/backness), height is a more fundamental
> > > distinction.
> > >
> > > - Rob
> >
> > ***
> > Patrick:
> >
> > Since Abkhaz is the _only_ language in the world to have such a
> > vowel system, it is completely unwarranted to draw such a
> > conclusion from it.
>
> I disagree. Since there seem to be no languages with a two-vowel
> inventory such that both vowels have the same height, but one is
> front and one is back, the conclusion *based on the evidence at hand*
> is that height is a more fundamental distinction.

***
Patrick:

Let us, for the moment, grant your point: height is the fundamental
distinction.

Well, so what? Where does that lead us that we might not have gone?

***

> > The great majority of languages have a front-central-back contrast
> > at whatever heights for each member.
> >
> > ***
>
> The two most common vowel inventories are both triangular in
> nature: /i a u/ and /i e a o u/. High vowels tend to have more
> frontness/backness contrasts than low vowls.

***
Patrick:

Yes, front and back vowels frequently have more height contrasts than
central vowels.

***




> - Rob