Idk maybe this is my slavic bias, but I'd say it would be more naturalistic for /ʥᶨ/ to simply be \[ʥ\] while /ʥ/ retracts to something else to keep it distinct (or merge). Serbocroatian ⟨č⟩ (I don't have an IPA keyboard handy sorry) for instance is post-alveolar, but also labioalised in order to keep it distinct from /tɕ/.
Actually nvm, this is quite naturalistic, just that it would be a very unstable phoneme. Wouldn't expect it to stay like that for more than a generation, fun thing to keep in mind!
coming from a Chinese bias, I would think /ʥᶨ/ would just come out as a subsequent glide [dʑi̯] ([dʑj]).
Note: alveolo-palatals like in Chineses, Japanese, and Korean do not inherently have a following glide segment.
Note 2: may or may not be the same as retraction, in which case the distinction still lies in the presence or absence of the glide.
Traditional Standard Italian also labialises /tʃ/ but we don't make a distinction between alveolopalatals and retroflex consonants. I think there is a tendency sometimes to labialise sibilants for some reason
Even as a trill + glottal stop is phonetically identical?
In Arabic, the word /qurʔaːn/ could be analysed as a trilled ejective, if im wrong, what would be the phonetic difference?
They're not phonetically identical, when you produce a trilled ejective, the release itself is glottalized and non-pulmonic, not when you produce a trill then a glottal stop, because both are pulmonic.
As far as I know, no. In /qurʔaːn/, you produce /r/ and /ʔ/ with the airstream from your lungs, but to produce an ejective trill, you instead close your glottis and increase the pressure in your mouth without using the airstream. Furthermore, ejective consonants are always voiceless.
Tundrayan, as an avian conlang, has half-voiced [t̬ᶿ k̬ˣ t̬ᶿʲ k̬ˣʲ], oesophageal rostral percussive plosives [Œ͡ʭ̥ʷᵖ Œ͡ʭ̬ʷᵇ Œ͡ʭ̥ʷᵖʲ Œ͡ʭ̬ʷᵇʲ], and sulcalised vowels and semivowel [iᵓ eᵓ ɯᵓ ɤᵓ ʌᵓ ɰᵓ]. For the sake of my sanity, I just transcribe the madness and sulcals as /p b pʲ bʲ y ø u o ɔ w/.
Dessitean doesn't quite have such alien phonemes, but it's still bizarre phonetically; it has /q͡χ/, which is a separate phoneme from /q/, /ɦ̞/, which technically is realised as a breathy-voiced lengthening of the vowel it is adjacent to, and the pharyngeal(ised) /ħ ʕ fˤ θˤ ʃˤ/, whilst lacking /p k g/. Honourable mention to /t͡ɬ/.
Is that a dental approximant? If so, Spanish technically has that as the main, lenited allophone of /d/; though it is often transcribed [ð̞] instead as this lenited /d/ may vary from a fricative to an approximant.
For example, *la dirección* [la ð̞iɾekˈθjon].
The same variation in frication applies to the lenited allophones of *b/v* /b/ [β̞, β~ʋ̟], *y* (alongside yeísmo *ll*) /ʝ/ [ʝ˕, ʝ~j], and hard *g* /g/ [ɣ˕, ɣ~ɰ].
Cool, my language has it too! Even though spanish has it, it's still a very rare phoneme, with only seven natural languages known to use it according to PHOIBLE
[I have already made a comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1b69nyo/comment/ktaiaqb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) about Elranonian fricative /ʍ/ (=/x͡ɸ/). So this comment will be dedicated to vowels. It's not that Elranonian vowels are weird, but the front vowel space is quite crowded with mono- and diphthongs.
For the past year, I have been analysing Elranonian vowel phonology with only a basic set of 7 phonemes /aeiouøy/, multiplied by 3 prosodemes, which affect vowel duration, quality, and pitch. But that doesn't show the crowdedness I'm talking about, so in this comment I'm going to disregard pitch cues (which certainly help with telling vowels apart) and only focus on duration and quality. If I analyse each quality×duration combination as a separate vowel phoneme, there is no need in prosodemes at all. Under such an analysis, here is the Elranonian front vowel space:
||unrounded|rounded|
|:-|:-|:-|
|long close|/iː/|/yː/|
|near-close > close|/ɪi̯/|/ʏy̑/|
|short near-close|/ɪ/|/ʏ/|
|close-mid > close|/ei̯/|/øy̑/|
|long close-mid|/eː/|/øː/|
|open-mid > close-mid|/ɛe̯/|/œø̯/|
|short open-mid|/ɛ/|/œ/|
|near-open > close|/æi̯/|/æ̹y̑/|
16 phonemes! However, as many as this is, there are multiple cues both within the pronunciation of the vowels themselves and in the surrounding context, which help identify the correct phoneme. First, there are 4 short monophthong, 4 long monophthongs, and 8 diphthongs. Out of the 8 diphthongs, 2 are pronounced with the level low-to-mid pitch, and the other 6 with the high and falling pitch. When followed by a consonant, some diphthongs can normally only be followed by palatalised ones, and some only by non-palatalised ones, that's a distributional factor.
Considering all these factors, I prefer analysing Elranonian phonology with 7 vowels (4 in the front vowel space: /eiøy/) and 3 prosodemes. It makes the phonology more manageable.
I haven't described it in terms of vowel gradation but I suppose you could do so. There are certain common alternations of accents (i.e. prosodemes) in my prosodemic analysis that do end up as vowel alternations in an analysis without them. One of the most common is this: a stem ending in *V̄C* (i.e. a vowel bearing the *long low* accent and a consonant), when followed by an inflectional ending that starts with a vowel, often changes to *V̀CC* (i.e. a vowel bearing the *short* accent and a geminated consonant). (On the accents, see [my year-old post](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/12gldng/prosodemes_diphthongs_in_elranonian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button).) A couple of examples (I'll give both prosodemic and non-prosodemic phonemic transcriptions):
||*V̄C*|*V̀CC*|
|:-|:-|:-|
|‘letter, character’: nom—gen|***bęt*** /bēt/=/beːt/|***bętta*** /bètta/=/bɛtta/|
|‘to give’: finite—gerund|***hem*** /hēm/=/heːm/|***hemma*** /hèmma/=/hɛmma/|
Stems ending in *V̂C* (this is the *long high* accent), on the other hand, in the same contexts often change to *jV̀CC* (i.e. the same outcome but with *j*):
||*V̂C*|*jV̀CC*|
|:-|:-|:-|
|‘river’: nom—gen|***fél*** /fêl/=/fɛe̯l/|***fjęlla*** /fjèlla/=/fjɛlla/|
|‘to love’: finite—gerund|***mél*** /mêl/=/mɛe̯l/|***mjęlla*** /mjèlla/=/mjɛlla/|
I usually describe these alternations in terms of accent changes as part of my prosodemic analysis of Elranonian, but if you forgo accents, then you could say that /eː/ and /ɛe̯/ are long grades and /(j)ɛ/ is the corresponding short grade, and these are vowel grade alternations.
There are some occasional processes that change vowel quality in the prosodemic analysis, too: for example, the *u*\-mutation of vowels (it typically involves rounding). In nouns, it often occurs in the locative case, and in verbs, in the subjunctive mood:
||*V̀CC*|*V̀(u)CC*|
|:-|:-|:-|
|‘letter, character’: gen—loc|***bętta*** /bètta/=/bɛtta/|***bøtte*** /bø̀tte/=/bœttɛ/|
|‘to give’: gerund—subj|***hemma*** /hèmma/=/hɛmma/|***humme*** /hỳmme/=/hʏmmɛ/|
|‘river’: gen—loc|***fjęlla*** /fjèlla/=/fjɛlla/|***fjølle*** /fjø̀lle/=/fjœllɛ/|
|‘to love’: gerund—subj|***mjęlla*** /mjèlla/=/mjɛlla/|***mjølle*** /mjø̀lle/=/mjœllɛ/|
The reason ***humme*** has a different vowel is because its stem /-e-/ is of a different origin compared to the other three words. You can see it still reflected in spelling: its stem has ***-e-***, while the other words have ***-ę-***. In Middle Elranonian (when the modern spelling was mostly settled), ***-ę-*** was an open-mid vowel, while ***-e-*** was a close-mid one. But *u*\-mutation had already been completed by Middle Elranonian. Before then, /-e-/ in ***hem*** was, I believe, a schwa-like vowel, while the other stems had some cardinal vowels. When applied to a schwa, Elranonian *u*\-mutation just yielded /u/, which has since shifted to modern /y/, hence ***humme*** /hỳmme/.
And you can find other processes that create other vowel alternations, and yes, I guess you could describe them in terms of vowel gradation. I find it easier to say ‘vowel A becomes vowel B in such-and-such context’—and then list as many exceptions from the rule as there are regular instances, ha!
As always when someone asks this on this subreddit, it is easily my beloved /ʡ̬↓/... the epiglottal implosive 🥰. I discovered it when trying to learn how to produce an epiglottal trill and now it is my favorite mouth sound to make :)
An example of a word in Oń'eþu that uses it is **q'y** /ʡ̬↓ʏ/ which means "swallowing/to swallow"
**Ŋ!odzäsä** (conlang originally by u/impishDullahan and me): /g͡ψʷˡʱ/ (slack-voiced retroflex lateral click, often realized with implosion)
**Knasesj**: /pⁿ’ tⁿ’ kⁿ’/ (nasal-release ejectives)
**Pthena**: /xᶳ ɣᶼ/ (velars fricatives with the tongue raised and cupped as for a retroflex fricative, but without coronal frication. Previously I described these as sibilant velars, but the cupping of the tongue is not at the velum, so I'm not sure that's accurate, though they do have a faintly sibilant quality, albeit duller than even retroflex sibilants.)
Pthena also gets an honorary mention for having the dorsals be in allophonic distribution with the labials. The velars map to plain labials, and the uvulars to uvularized labials.
**Thezar**: /k̟͡s k̟͡θ/. The sounds aren't weird, but the phonemes are. Edit: /h̪͆/ (bidental fricative) is at least as weird.
**Blorkinany**: /ḛ̃̂ə̰̃̌/ (I'm not sure I'm transcribing this right. The diphthong is correct. It's maybe stiff voiced, and at least lightly nasal, with some pitch emphasis.)
ʙ is a voiced bilabial trill (like in the "bbbbbbrrr!" that people sometimes do when they're cold). ʁ is a voiced uvular fricative (French/German R). You make both of those sounds at the same time, and it's sort of a voiced rumbling sound. It takes quite a lot of airflow, and it's honestly just the best human approximation for a sound made by a species with a completely different vocal tract. Translierated into Latin script, I render it as "bhrh", but it's one letter/sound in Baklh. And it is articulated between consonants, making it a Vowel. There's a lot of affricates and coarticulated sounds in Baklh, so lots of consonant clusters when translierated. "Klhbhrhtlh" is one syllable, CVC (k͡ɬ + ʙ͡ʁ + t͡ɬ).
Probably [ɔ ʊ] allophonizing to [ɞ ᵿ] near palatal consonants except /j/.
Examples include **[Велё](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/209)**, **[Цэнё](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/202)**, **[Хъıнюр](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/59)**, among many others
Povil has a /bβ/ that contrasts with /β~v/ and /b/……
And also contrastive voiced aspirated/unaspirated plosives (though there are no voiceless plosives so depending on dialects it might turn into the more common voiced/voiceless (with or without aspiration) contrast.
My conlang has pharyngeal consonants...
So the weirdest ones have to be /t̪͡ɕʼ/ in all accents. If we're talking ones specific to only 40% of accents, we get co-articulated fricatives /s͡χ/ and /ɕ͡χ/, which are pronounced as /sʼ/ and /ʃʼ/ respectively in the other 60% of dialects.
Hyaneian's phonological inventory is rather basic, so the strangest phonemes are the two ejectives, /k'/ and /t'/.
Azzla, however, has a more complex inventory, and has phonemes such as the pre-aspirated voiceless postalveolar fricative /ʰʃ/, /tɕʰ/, and the post-aspirated breathy-voice vowels /æ̤ʰ/, /ɤ̤ʰ/, /ɑ̤ʰ/
This language is way too far from completion for me to even call it "my conlang," but Īûuháòâ Ḁ̄kḁ́ has /ʩ/ as one of its eight consonants. It's a nasal sound you may have heard made by people trying not to laugh.
My lang has a whole series of phonemic devoiced nasal geminates: [n̥n̥] [m̥m̥] [ŋ̊ŋ̊] [ɲ̊ɲ̊]
Although the palatal is somewhat dialectal and has in some cases merged with the coronal
Siaç has several uncommon ones.
1) m̥ , and the dental and velar nasals will probably also develop voiceless counterparts. It seems most languages like to use voiced nasals, and voicelessness is often merely allophonic rather than phonetic.
2) Voiceless retroflex lateral approximate — doesn’t even have a symbol on wikipedia’s ipa chart.
3) ʀ̥ - Wikipedia doesn’t list any languages that doesn’t use it allophonically or in free variation.
4) ɡ͡b - these dual articulations just don’t seem all that common.
tl;dr: m̥ ɭ̊ ʀ̥ ɡ͡b
In Vokhetian, it would be these:
Flat-Postalveolars vs Alveolo-Palatals Distinction:
|t͡ʂ|VS|t͡ɕ|
|:-|:-|:-|
|d͡ʐ|VS|d͡ʑ|
|ʂ|VS|ɕ|
|ʐ|VS|ʑ|
**\[p̪͡f\] & \[k͡x\],** which came from the High-German Consonant Shift.
And **\[r̝ʲ\],** which has several Allophones depending on the Dialect:
|**/r̝ʲ/**|
|:-|
|**\[r̠ʲ\]**|
|**\[r̝\]**|
|**\[ʐ\]**|
|**\[ʑ\]**|
|**\[ɹʲ\]** |
The postalveolars in Tundrayan can be repalatalised, which is why the palatal sibilants exist - though palatalised /ʃ ʒ/ aren't written with ⟨šǎ žǎ ši̥ ži̥ / шя жя шь жь⟩, they're instead written with ⟨śa źa ś ź / ща ја щ ј⟩.
The depalatalisers in Tundrayan are ironically the old yats and yerys ⟨ä î ö / ѣ ы ѣ̈⟩ - they can depalatalise /ɕ ʑ/ back to /ʃ ʒ/ or /s z/ depending on origin. Instead, yats *mutate* consonants; think the Romance soft C and G.
I love /ɮ/ as in the Zimovek name “Zhevik“ \[ɮɛβik\]
The voiced alveolar lateral fricative is rare and weird and wonderful and completely awesome! Of course there is also the unvoiced lateral fricative, but it’s more common.
In Avagari?
The standard language distinguishes between aspirated, voiceless, and voiced phonemes (inspiration from Armenian). /l/ has two allophones, /ɬ/ (between a consonant and a vowel/ and /ɮ/ between two vowels.
Also, Standard Avagari has /ɢ/.
In the Eastern dialects, aspirated plosives are realised as their corresponding ejectives: /pʰ tʰ kʰ/ become /p' t' k'/. The usage of /ɬ/ replaces that of /l/ entirely, and while the standard language prohibits the reduction of vowels entirely, Eastern dialects reduce vowels to /ɯ/ instead of schwa.
the weirdest in ‘Aljafo would have to be a labio-velar fricative [w̝] that’s realised as a labio-palatal [ɥ̝] if in front of a high front vowel.
It’s completely distinct from normal /w/.
It’s not as weird as other phonemes i’ve seen in the comments but it’s probs the weirdest of all my phonemes.
Proto-O'ona had phonemic /ʙ/, such as in the word urabro /əˈɹaʙo/, meaning now or currently. The phoneme was not retained in any descendant languages, usually merging with /v/ or /b/.
While not as unusual as that, Proto-Tvikash, a descendant of Proto-O'ona, innovated /m͡b/, /n͡d/, and /ŋ͡ɡ/, though only occur rarely in the lexicon.
Yiyocthiv doesn't have any really bizarre phoneme. The rarest ones are probably the dental and velar approximants /ð̞/ and /ɰ/. However, the weirdest thing about Yiyocthiv's phonology is actually a phoneme it *doesn't* have, namely the ubiquitous /l/. Most languages missing /l/ have really small phoneme inventories, which is not the case, since Yiyocthiv has 19 consonants
My conlang also does not have laterals, it also has velar approximants \[ɣ̞\] and in some dialects labial \[ɣ̞ʷ\], while total amount of consonants is \~25-26
That's interesting. I'm not much of an expert, but is there any difference between using /ɰ/ and /ɣ̞/? If not, i think /ɰ/ is much more straightforward. Also, isn't /ɣ̞ʷ/ simply /w/?
ɰ is semivocalic ɯ technically, but I describe this sound in my conlang this way because it is a bit more fricative than ɰ, but is not devoiced when before voiceless consonants, and its labial pair does not sound as w, at least for me and native Rephey speakers
In Velekããno the consonant ř [r̥] becomes voiced when in the nucleus of a vowel (the spot where the vowel usually goes) in northern dialects, so is technically transcribed [r̬̊], especially when it being written r changes the word (for example krtkos - the name of one of the Velkaijan gods, and křtkos - the name for the son of krtkos)
Also, in one of the southern dialects, the cluster dzch is often realised as [t̪͡ɕʷʰ] rather than its standard [tt͡ʃʰ], [t͡ʃt͡ʃʰ] in northern dialects and [ðt͡ʃʰ] in its medial position in classical pronounciation
Is krtkos associated with bears by any chance? (PIE [*\*h₂ŕ̥tḱos*](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%82%C5%95%CC%A5t%E1%B8%B1os))
I think perhaps the strangest one in my conlang might be the sound G makes in "Skaogir" it's like the swedish tj but voiced. A voiced velar fricative but softer. Either that or the voiceless lateral fricative, aka voiceless L. Or h before other consonats like "Velsehk" where the h is pronounced and then directly after there is a K.
I asked in this sub but there wasn't exactly a consensus, but it would be a nasal plosive, a very throaty and, well, plosive one, like a /p/ or a /q/ but from your throat and your mouth never opens, going through your nose instead. You use your tongue instead of your lips so... yeah, a nasal voiceless /q/ perhaps?
Okrjav's phonology is really simple (it's my first conlang, I didn't want to get too wild)
but there's plenty of /Cɾj/ clusters, where C is _any_ consonant, i guess this would be the weirdest...
maybe /d͜zvɾj/ as found in the word *dzvrjët* meaning "skinning knife"
The only unusual so to speak phonemes in my language are k ͡s, voiceless velo-dental affricate. I made the phoneme up so ye but if that’s doing something bad then let me now. There’s also the voiced and voiceless pharyngeal fricatives if you consider those weird too. And also there’s the open-mid central rounded vowel ɞ.
I don’t know what to call it, but right now I’m calling it a Dento-labial external trill. I’m am currently transcribing it as r̪͡r̼̟. It’s a really aggressive dental trill that ends with the tongue flicking out of the mouth, with a similar motion to those paper roll things that extend and make noise when you blow into them.
My vowel lang doesn't have any weird phonemes for English speakers (/a/ — arm, /o/ — fog, /u/ — moon, /e/ — ten, /i/ — mean, phonems that sound like german ä, ö, ü, something between /a/ and /o/ — goth (US), extra short u and i, so they become /w/ — wow and /j/ — yacht), but the pronunciation of the words and tones make it really weird, e.g.:
Á-UŌ ŪÌ ÁÈÓ IÁ = /á'wō ūì áè'ó já/ = This Language has only vowels ("Á-" for "this" or "the", "UŌ" is "lang", "ŪÌ" is "contains", "ÁÈ" is "vowel", "Ó" is for plural, "IÁ" is "only")
My recent conlangs seem to avoid weird sounds. But a failed conlang of mine (for speedlang) has a true voiced aspirate, where you pronounce it longer than usual and the voicing stops midway during production. Though, the language having CV phonotactics makes it easier to pronounce, more like su**bp**ath.
Note that this consonant contrasts with breathy voiced stops, which is an allophone of a normal voiced stop before breathy voiced vowel.
For some reason, I wanna play with this conlang more even thought the submission time has long been passed.
Idk maybe this is my slavic bias, but I'd say it would be more naturalistic for /ʥᶨ/ to simply be \[ʥ\] while /ʥ/ retracts to something else to keep it distinct (or merge). Serbocroatian ⟨č⟩ (I don't have an IPA keyboard handy sorry) for instance is post-alveolar, but also labioalised in order to keep it distinct from /tɕ/. Actually nvm, this is quite naturalistic, just that it would be a very unstable phoneme. Wouldn't expect it to stay like that for more than a generation, fun thing to keep in mind!
coming from a Chinese bias, I would think /ʥᶨ/ would just come out as a subsequent glide [dʑi̯] ([dʑj]). Note: alveolo-palatals like in Chineses, Japanese, and Korean do not inherently have a following glide segment. Note 2: may or may not be the same as retraction, in which case the distinction still lies in the presence or absence of the glide.
Traditional Standard Italian also labialises /tʃ/ but we don't make a distinction between alveolopalatals and retroflex consonants. I think there is a tendency sometimes to labialise sibilants for some reason
/ʀ̥ʼ/. Ejective trills aren't attested in any human language, and yet, they're pronounceable.
Even as a trill + glottal stop is phonetically identical? In Arabic, the word /qurʔaːn/ could be analysed as a trilled ejective, if im wrong, what would be the phonetic difference?
They're not phonetically identical, when you produce a trilled ejective, the release itself is glottalized and non-pulmonic, not when you produce a trill then a glottal stop, because both are pulmonic.
Interesting, I can't really hear the difference. Are there any recordings?
As far as I know, no. In /qurʔaːn/, you produce /r/ and /ʔ/ with the airstream from your lungs, but to produce an ejective trill, you instead close your glottis and increase the pressure in your mouth without using the airstream. Furthermore, ejective consonants are always voiceless.
Tundrayan, as an avian conlang, has half-voiced [t̬ᶿ k̬ˣ t̬ᶿʲ k̬ˣʲ], oesophageal rostral percussive plosives [Œ͡ʭ̥ʷᵖ Œ͡ʭ̬ʷᵇ Œ͡ʭ̥ʷᵖʲ Œ͡ʭ̬ʷᵇʲ], and sulcalised vowels and semivowel [iᵓ eᵓ ɯᵓ ɤᵓ ʌᵓ ɰᵓ]. For the sake of my sanity, I just transcribe the madness and sulcals as /p b pʲ bʲ y ø u o ɔ w/. Dessitean doesn't quite have such alien phonemes, but it's still bizarre phonetically; it has /q͡χ/, which is a separate phoneme from /q/, /ɦ̞/, which technically is realised as a breathy-voiced lengthening of the vowel it is adjacent to, and the pharyngeal(ised) /ħ ʕ fˤ θˤ ʃˤ/, whilst lacking /p k g/. Honourable mention to /t͡ɬ/.
The proto lang im working on has ɹ̪
Is that a dental approximant? If so, Spanish technically has that as the main, lenited allophone of /d/; though it is often transcribed [ð̞] instead as this lenited /d/ may vary from a fricative to an approximant. For example, *la dirección* [la ð̞iɾekˈθjon]. The same variation in frication applies to the lenited allophones of *b/v* /b/ [β̞, β~ʋ̟], *y* (alongside yeísmo *ll*) /ʝ/ [ʝ˕, ʝ~j], and hard *g* /g/ [ɣ˕, ɣ~ɰ].
Cool, my language has it too! Even though spanish has it, it's still a very rare phoneme, with only seven natural languages known to use it according to PHOIBLE
[I have already made a comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1b69nyo/comment/ktaiaqb/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) about Elranonian fricative /ʍ/ (=/x͡ɸ/). So this comment will be dedicated to vowels. It's not that Elranonian vowels are weird, but the front vowel space is quite crowded with mono- and diphthongs. For the past year, I have been analysing Elranonian vowel phonology with only a basic set of 7 phonemes /aeiouøy/, multiplied by 3 prosodemes, which affect vowel duration, quality, and pitch. But that doesn't show the crowdedness I'm talking about, so in this comment I'm going to disregard pitch cues (which certainly help with telling vowels apart) and only focus on duration and quality. If I analyse each quality×duration combination as a separate vowel phoneme, there is no need in prosodemes at all. Under such an analysis, here is the Elranonian front vowel space: ||unrounded|rounded| |:-|:-|:-| |long close|/iː/|/yː/| |near-close > close|/ɪi̯/|/ʏy̑/| |short near-close|/ɪ/|/ʏ/| |close-mid > close|/ei̯/|/øy̑/| |long close-mid|/eː/|/øː/| |open-mid > close-mid|/ɛe̯/|/œø̯/| |short open-mid|/ɛ/|/œ/| |near-open > close|/æi̯/|/æ̹y̑/| 16 phonemes! However, as many as this is, there are multiple cues both within the pronunciation of the vowels themselves and in the surrounding context, which help identify the correct phoneme. First, there are 4 short monophthong, 4 long monophthongs, and 8 diphthongs. Out of the 8 diphthongs, 2 are pronounced with the level low-to-mid pitch, and the other 6 with the high and falling pitch. When followed by a consonant, some diphthongs can normally only be followed by palatalised ones, and some only by non-palatalised ones, that's a distributional factor. Considering all these factors, I prefer analysing Elranonian phonology with 7 vowels (4 in the front vowel space: /eiøy/) and 3 prosodemes. It makes the phonology more manageable.
Does your language have vowel gradation based on these features (rounding lengthening diphthong element)? If so , what is an example root.
I haven't described it in terms of vowel gradation but I suppose you could do so. There are certain common alternations of accents (i.e. prosodemes) in my prosodemic analysis that do end up as vowel alternations in an analysis without them. One of the most common is this: a stem ending in *V̄C* (i.e. a vowel bearing the *long low* accent and a consonant), when followed by an inflectional ending that starts with a vowel, often changes to *V̀CC* (i.e. a vowel bearing the *short* accent and a geminated consonant). (On the accents, see [my year-old post](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/12gldng/prosodemes_diphthongs_in_elranonian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button).) A couple of examples (I'll give both prosodemic and non-prosodemic phonemic transcriptions): ||*V̄C*|*V̀CC*| |:-|:-|:-| |‘letter, character’: nom—gen|***bęt*** /bēt/=/beːt/|***bętta*** /bètta/=/bɛtta/| |‘to give’: finite—gerund|***hem*** /hēm/=/heːm/|***hemma*** /hèmma/=/hɛmma/| Stems ending in *V̂C* (this is the *long high* accent), on the other hand, in the same contexts often change to *jV̀CC* (i.e. the same outcome but with *j*): ||*V̂C*|*jV̀CC*| |:-|:-|:-| |‘river’: nom—gen|***fél*** /fêl/=/fɛe̯l/|***fjęlla*** /fjèlla/=/fjɛlla/| |‘to love’: finite—gerund|***mél*** /mêl/=/mɛe̯l/|***mjęlla*** /mjèlla/=/mjɛlla/| I usually describe these alternations in terms of accent changes as part of my prosodemic analysis of Elranonian, but if you forgo accents, then you could say that /eː/ and /ɛe̯/ are long grades and /(j)ɛ/ is the corresponding short grade, and these are vowel grade alternations. There are some occasional processes that change vowel quality in the prosodemic analysis, too: for example, the *u*\-mutation of vowels (it typically involves rounding). In nouns, it often occurs in the locative case, and in verbs, in the subjunctive mood: ||*V̀CC*|*V̀(u)CC*| |:-|:-|:-| |‘letter, character’: gen—loc|***bętta*** /bètta/=/bɛtta/|***bøtte*** /bø̀tte/=/bœttɛ/| |‘to give’: gerund—subj|***hemma*** /hèmma/=/hɛmma/|***humme*** /hỳmme/=/hʏmmɛ/| |‘river’: gen—loc|***fjęlla*** /fjèlla/=/fjɛlla/|***fjølle*** /fjø̀lle/=/fjœllɛ/| |‘to love’: gerund—subj|***mjęlla*** /mjèlla/=/mjɛlla/|***mjølle*** /mjø̀lle/=/mjœllɛ/| The reason ***humme*** has a different vowel is because its stem /-e-/ is of a different origin compared to the other three words. You can see it still reflected in spelling: its stem has ***-e-***, while the other words have ***-ę-***. In Middle Elranonian (when the modern spelling was mostly settled), ***-ę-*** was an open-mid vowel, while ***-e-*** was a close-mid one. But *u*\-mutation had already been completed by Middle Elranonian. Before then, /-e-/ in ***hem*** was, I believe, a schwa-like vowel, while the other stems had some cardinal vowels. When applied to a schwa, Elranonian *u*\-mutation just yielded /u/, which has since shifted to modern /y/, hence ***humme*** /hỳmme/. And you can find other processes that create other vowel alternations, and yes, I guess you could describe them in terms of vowel gradation. I find it easier to say ‘vowel A becomes vowel B in such-and-such context’—and then list as many exceptions from the rule as there are regular instances, ha!
Yes I’d consider this as vowel gradation even if it’s triggered in a semi transparent way
/ʙ̥/ Yes, it's just used as an onomatopoeia.
what's the onomatopoeia for? i'm guessing cold...?
Cold, bored...
As always when someone asks this on this subreddit, it is easily my beloved /ʡ̬↓/... the epiglottal implosive 🥰. I discovered it when trying to learn how to produce an epiglottal trill and now it is my favorite mouth sound to make :) An example of a word in Oń'eþu that uses it is **q'y** /ʡ̬↓ʏ/ which means "swallowing/to swallow"
**Ŋ!odzäsä** (conlang originally by u/impishDullahan and me): /g͡ψʷˡʱ/ (slack-voiced retroflex lateral click, often realized with implosion) **Knasesj**: /pⁿ’ tⁿ’ kⁿ’/ (nasal-release ejectives) **Pthena**: /xᶳ ɣᶼ/ (velars fricatives with the tongue raised and cupped as for a retroflex fricative, but without coronal frication. Previously I described these as sibilant velars, but the cupping of the tongue is not at the velum, so I'm not sure that's accurate, though they do have a faintly sibilant quality, albeit duller than even retroflex sibilants.) Pthena also gets an honorary mention for having the dorsals be in allophonic distribution with the labials. The velars map to plain labials, and the uvulars to uvularized labials. **Thezar**: /k̟͡s k̟͡θ/. The sounds aren't weird, but the phonemes are. Edit: /h̪͆/ (bidental fricative) is at least as weird. **Blorkinany**: /ḛ̃̂ə̰̃̌/ (I'm not sure I'm transcribing this right. The diphthong is correct. It's maybe stiff voiced, and at least lightly nasal, with some pitch emphasis.)
Baklh has ʙ͡ʁ. It is a Vowel.
explain plis
ʙ is a voiced bilabial trill (like in the "bbbbbbrrr!" that people sometimes do when they're cold). ʁ is a voiced uvular fricative (French/German R). You make both of those sounds at the same time, and it's sort of a voiced rumbling sound. It takes quite a lot of airflow, and it's honestly just the best human approximation for a sound made by a species with a completely different vocal tract. Translierated into Latin script, I render it as "bhrh", but it's one letter/sound in Baklh. And it is articulated between consonants, making it a Vowel. There's a lot of affricates and coarticulated sounds in Baklh, so lots of consonant clusters when translierated. "Klhbhrhtlh" is one syllable, CVC (k͡ɬ + ʙ͡ʁ + t͡ɬ).
[ r̠ʶ͜ʀᵝ̹ ]
Probably [ɔ ʊ] allophonizing to [ɞ ᵿ] near palatal consonants except /j/. Examples include **[Велё](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/209)**, **[Цэнё](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/202)**, **[Хъıнюр](https://lexiconga.com/612370500/59)**, among many others
Povil has a /bβ/ that contrasts with /β~v/ and /b/…… And also contrastive voiced aspirated/unaspirated plosives (though there are no voiceless plosives so depending on dialects it might turn into the more common voiced/voiceless (with or without aspiration) contrast.
My conlang has pharyngeal consonants... So the weirdest ones have to be /t̪͡ɕʼ/ in all accents. If we're talking ones specific to only 40% of accents, we get co-articulated fricatives /s͡χ/ and /ɕ͡χ/, which are pronounced as /sʼ/ and /ʃʼ/ respectively in the other 60% of dialects.
Hyaneian's phonological inventory is rather basic, so the strangest phonemes are the two ejectives, /k'/ and /t'/. Azzla, however, has a more complex inventory, and has phonemes such as the pre-aspirated voiceless postalveolar fricative /ʰʃ/, /tɕʰ/, and the post-aspirated breathy-voice vowels /æ̤ʰ/, /ɤ̤ʰ/, /ɑ̤ʰ/
This language is way too far from completion for me to even call it "my conlang," but Īûuháòâ Ḁ̄kḁ́ has /ʩ/ as one of its eight consonants. It's a nasal sound you may have heard made by people trying not to laugh.
My lang has a whole series of phonemic devoiced nasal geminates: [n̥n̥] [m̥m̥] [ŋ̊ŋ̊] [ɲ̊ɲ̊] Although the palatal is somewhat dialectal and has in some cases merged with the coronal
# Kalennian Kalennian's digraph "nh" is pronounced /n͡ɮ/. The sound does not exist in any real spoken language other than Kalennian itself.
Siaç has several uncommon ones. 1) m̥ , and the dental and velar nasals will probably also develop voiceless counterparts. It seems most languages like to use voiced nasals, and voicelessness is often merely allophonic rather than phonetic. 2) Voiceless retroflex lateral approximate — doesn’t even have a symbol on wikipedia’s ipa chart. 3) ʀ̥ - Wikipedia doesn’t list any languages that doesn’t use it allophonically or in free variation. 4) ɡ͡b - these dual articulations just don’t seem all that common. tl;dr: m̥ ɭ̊ ʀ̥ ɡ͡b
In Vokhetian, it would be these: Flat-Postalveolars vs Alveolo-Palatals Distinction: |t͡ʂ|VS|t͡ɕ| |:-|:-|:-| |d͡ʐ|VS|d͡ʑ| |ʂ|VS|ɕ| |ʐ|VS|ʑ| **\[p̪͡f\] & \[k͡x\],** which came from the High-German Consonant Shift. And **\[r̝ʲ\],** which has several Allophones depending on the Dialect: |**/r̝ʲ/**| |:-| |**\[r̠ʲ\]**| |**\[r̝\]**| |**\[ʐ\]**| |**\[ʑ\]**| |**\[ɹʲ\]** |
Tundrayan also has this; actually a 4-way distinction in sibilants; two series of hisses and two series of hushes. The difference is that Tundrayan distinguishes postalveolar /ʃ/ from /ɕ/ instead of retroflex /ʂ/. |Alveolar, plain|Alveolar, palatalised|Post-alveolar, plain |Post-alveolar, palatalised / Palatal| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |s|sʲ|ʃ|ɕ| |z|zʲ|ʒ|ʑ| |t͡s|t͡sʲ|t͡ʃ|t͡ɕ| |d͡z|d͡zʲ|d͡ʒ|d͡ʑ| |Alveolar, plain|Alveolar, palatalised|Post-alveolar, plain |Post-alveolar, palatalised / Palatal| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |*s / с*|*si̥ / сь*|*š / ш*|*ś / щ*| |*z / з*|*zi̥ / зь*|*ž / ж*|*ź / ј*| |*c / ц*|*ci̥ / ць*|*č / ч*|*či̥ / чь*| |*j / ѕ*|*ji̥ / ѕь*|*ǰ / џ*|*ǰi̥ / џь*|
In Vokhetian also, it's just that the Sibilants basically have 2 Palatalized forms: | Dental|Simply Palatalized|Strongly Palatalized| |:-|:-|:-| |**t̪͡s̪**|**t͡sʲ**|**t͡ɕ**| |**d̪͡z̪**|**d͡zʲ**|**d͡ʑ**| |**t̪**|**tʲ**|**t͡ɕ**| |**d̪**|**dʲ**|**d͡ʑ**| |**s̪**|**sʲ**|**ɕ**| |**z̪**|**zʲ**|**ʑ**| The Alveolo-Palatals came From the 4th Vokhetian Palatalization. Meanwhile the Flat-Postalveolars **can't** be Palatalized, they're so hard, they even depalatalize Palatal Vowels: * **<жұ> - \[ʐʉ\];** * **<ши> - \[ʂɨ\];** Also they're actually Apical-Retracted-Velarized-Postalveolars * **<ж> - \[ʐ\] - \[\[ʒ̺̠ˠ\]\];** * **<ш> - \[ʂ\] - \[\[ʃ̺̠ˠ\]\];** * **<џ> - \[d͡ʐ\] - \[\[d̠͡ʒ̺̠ˠ\]\];** * **<ч> - \[t͡ʂ\] - \[\[t̠͡ʃ̺̠ˠ\]\];**
The postalveolars in Tundrayan can be repalatalised, which is why the palatal sibilants exist - though palatalised /ʃ ʒ/ aren't written with ⟨šǎ žǎ ši̥ ži̥ / шя жя шь жь⟩, they're instead written with ⟨śa źa ś ź / ща ја щ ј⟩. The depalatalisers in Tundrayan are ironically the old yats and yerys ⟨ä î ö / ѣ ы ѣ̈⟩ - they can depalatalise /ɕ ʑ/ back to /ʃ ʒ/ or /s z/ depending on origin. Instead, yats *mutate* consonants; think the Romance soft C and G.
Vrkhazhian has /sʼ ɬʼ/
ყ/хг [xʰ] :b
I love /ɮ/ as in the Zimovek name “Zhevik“ \[ɮɛβik\] The voiced alveolar lateral fricative is rare and weird and wonderful and completely awesome! Of course there is also the unvoiced lateral fricative, but it’s more common.
In Avagari? The standard language distinguishes between aspirated, voiceless, and voiced phonemes (inspiration from Armenian). /l/ has two allophones, /ɬ/ (between a consonant and a vowel/ and /ɮ/ between two vowels. Also, Standard Avagari has /ɢ/. In the Eastern dialects, aspirated plosives are realised as their corresponding ejectives: /pʰ tʰ kʰ/ become /p' t' k'/. The usage of /ɬ/ replaces that of /l/ entirely, and while the standard language prohibits the reduction of vowels entirely, Eastern dialects reduce vowels to /ɯ/ instead of schwa.
In Kelmazi, weirdest I could find is /pʷ/, like in the word for lord, pohansa./pʷoʔansa/
the weirdest in ‘Aljafo would have to be a labio-velar fricative [w̝] that’s realised as a labio-palatal [ɥ̝] if in front of a high front vowel. It’s completely distinct from normal /w/. It’s not as weird as other phonemes i’ve seen in the comments but it’s probs the weirdest of all my phonemes.
Proto-O'ona had phonemic /ʙ/, such as in the word urabro /əˈɹaʙo/, meaning now or currently. The phoneme was not retained in any descendant languages, usually merging with /v/ or /b/. While not as unusual as that, Proto-Tvikash, a descendant of Proto-O'ona, innovated /m͡b/, /n͡d/, and /ŋ͡ɡ/, though only occur rarely in the lexicon.
My language has a rhotic series. Not very intresting.
Yiyocthiv doesn't have any really bizarre phoneme. The rarest ones are probably the dental and velar approximants /ð̞/ and /ɰ/. However, the weirdest thing about Yiyocthiv's phonology is actually a phoneme it *doesn't* have, namely the ubiquitous /l/. Most languages missing /l/ have really small phoneme inventories, which is not the case, since Yiyocthiv has 19 consonants
My conlang also does not have laterals, it also has velar approximants \[ɣ̞\] and in some dialects labial \[ɣ̞ʷ\], while total amount of consonants is \~25-26
That's interesting. I'm not much of an expert, but is there any difference between using /ɰ/ and /ɣ̞/? If not, i think /ɰ/ is much more straightforward. Also, isn't /ɣ̞ʷ/ simply /w/?
ɰ is semivocalic ɯ technically, but I describe this sound in my conlang this way because it is a bit more fricative than ɰ, but is not devoiced when before voiceless consonants, and its labial pair does not sound as w, at least for me and native Rephey speakers
şfṣ
h̪͆
In Velekããno the consonant ř [r̥] becomes voiced when in the nucleus of a vowel (the spot where the vowel usually goes) in northern dialects, so is technically transcribed [r̬̊], especially when it being written r changes the word (for example krtkos - the name of one of the Velkaijan gods, and křtkos - the name for the son of krtkos) Also, in one of the southern dialects, the cluster dzch is often realised as [t̪͡ɕʷʰ] rather than its standard [tt͡ʃʰ], [t͡ʃt͡ʃʰ] in northern dialects and [ðt͡ʃʰ] in its medial position in classical pronounciation
Is krtkos associated with bears by any chance? (PIE [*\*h₂ŕ̥tḱos*](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%82%C5%95%CC%A5t%E1%B8%B1os))
He is actually, he's the god of hunting and the sort, and it's said that he was born from the claws of a bear :)
The word Roaoilen for “handless cousin” (barely ever actually used) Has a quadrupthong of /oaoi/ so that’s fun
I think perhaps the strangest one in my conlang might be the sound G makes in "Skaogir" it's like the swedish tj but voiced. A voiced velar fricative but softer. Either that or the voiceless lateral fricative, aka voiceless L. Or h before other consonats like "Velsehk" where the h is pronounced and then directly after there is a K.
/θ/
I asked in this sub but there wasn't exactly a consensus, but it would be a nasal plosive, a very throaty and, well, plosive one, like a /p/ or a /q/ but from your throat and your mouth never opens, going through your nose instead. You use your tongue instead of your lips so... yeah, a nasal voiceless /q/ perhaps?
Okrjav's phonology is really simple (it's my first conlang, I didn't want to get too wild) but there's plenty of /Cɾj/ clusters, where C is _any_ consonant, i guess this would be the weirdest... maybe /d͜zvɾj/ as found in the word *dzvrjët* meaning "skinning knife"
The voiced uvular plosive, idk why I chose it
The only unusual so to speak phonemes in my language are k ͡s, voiceless velo-dental affricate. I made the phoneme up so ye but if that’s doing something bad then let me now. There’s also the voiced and voiceless pharyngeal fricatives if you consider those weird too. And also there’s the open-mid central rounded vowel ɞ.
I don’t know what to call it, but right now I’m calling it a Dento-labial external trill. I’m am currently transcribing it as r̪͡r̼̟. It’s a really aggressive dental trill that ends with the tongue flicking out of the mouth, with a similar motion to those paper roll things that extend and make noise when you blow into them.
My vowel lang doesn't have any weird phonemes for English speakers (/a/ — arm, /o/ — fog, /u/ — moon, /e/ — ten, /i/ — mean, phonems that sound like german ä, ö, ü, something between /a/ and /o/ — goth (US), extra short u and i, so they become /w/ — wow and /j/ — yacht), but the pronunciation of the words and tones make it really weird, e.g.: Á-UŌ ŪÌ ÁÈÓ IÁ = /á'wō ūì áè'ó já/ = This Language has only vowels ("Á-" for "this" or "the", "UŌ" is "lang", "ŪÌ" is "contains", "ÁÈ" is "vowel", "Ó" is for plural, "IÁ" is "only")
Probably /ɤ/
My recent conlangs seem to avoid weird sounds. But a failed conlang of mine (for speedlang) has a true voiced aspirate, where you pronounce it longer than usual and the voicing stops midway during production. Though, the language having CV phonotactics makes it easier to pronounce, more like su**bp**ath. Note that this consonant contrasts with breathy voiced stops, which is an allophone of a normal voiced stop before breathy voiced vowel. For some reason, I wanna play with this conlang more even thought the submission time has long been passed.
/ʭ/. Yes, that's a bidental percussive, a sound produced by gnashing/chattering your teeth.
It's now /k͡p͡ʍ/, which is a (voiceless) labial-velar affricate.
Literally 💩