From robin@xxxxxxx.xxx.xxx Tue Dec 1 06:22:56 1998
X-Digest-Num: 21
Message-ID: <44114.21.88.959273823@eGroups.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 16:22:56 +0200
From: Robin Turner <robin@xxxxxxx.xxx.xxx
Subject: Re: X-files

PILCH Hartmut wrote:

> > Probably both the German sounds in "ich" and "ach" would work. I am not sure
> > that either of them is described with a different symbol from /x/.
>
> these are contextual allophones: the palatalized one after front (e i \"a
> \"o \"u) vowels, as in "ich", the non-palatalized one after back (a o u)
> vowels, as in "Bach".
>
> In Modern Greek it works the opposite way: palatalized *before* front
> vowels (as in "oxi" for "no"), non-palatalized *before* back vowels (as
> in "mixaniki" for "mechanics").
>
> For a conlang, one of these two distributions would have to be chosen.
> I'd prefer to avoid the choice and use only a non-palatalized x.
>

I would have thought that we could just as easily leave it up to the speaker. I
palatalise all the time, simply because I prefer the sound.

co'o mi'e robin.