Vreleksá

Kiri · Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy

Is soft-sounding vs hard-sounding just a personal feeling of each language user or is there any theory to it?

If there is, can you tell me what sounds or cathegories are mor soft-sounding or more hard-sounding?

In other words, is there any more or less universal theory as to what constitutes a soft/hard sound?

Aert · Joined: 03 Jul 2008 Posts: 354

Don't know about a universal theory, but often palatal(ized) sounds are considered more 'soft' eg. in Russian there are the the plain consonants and the 'soft' (palatalized) consonants.

Quite a few languages make distinctions in terms of plain, labialized, palatalized, ejective, glottalized, or pharyngealized consonants, but rarely (I think) do they contrast more than two of these, including the plain consonant.

There are several sounds that are stereotyped to be hard, and as such are used in conlangs for specific effects eg. the uvular consonants in Klingon.

Is this for a project? I'd be interested to hear about it Smile

Kiri · Joined: 13 Jun 2009 Posts: 471 Location: Latvia/Italy

Since yesterday I've found three diferent distinctions:
1. The one Aert told about (plain vs palatalised)
2. Plosives (hard) vs Fricatives (soft)
3. Unvoiced (hard) vs Voiced (soft)

I don't really need The Truth as much as some unifying concept as a basis, because, as Aert guessed, it is indeed for a project.
I want to make two languages that would be related to each other in terms of vocabulary but otherwise the opposite of each other, one such distinction being hard-sounding vs soft-sounding

eldin raigmore · Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:52 am Post subject:

Old Irish had thick sounds and thin sounds.
Don't some Dravidian languages have "high-caste" and "low-caste"?
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission