Reconstruction talk:Proto-Japonic/mentu

Phonology and the descendants
@Chuterix, @Eirikr — hi, sorry to bother you about this. I saw this reconstruction and am wondering how we can arrive at the -e- in the reconstruction, considering that all the descendants appear to have -i- instead. Wouldn't it be simpler to assume the proto-form had an -i-, making it easier to explain all the descendant? Or would -i- actually mean that some of the descendants would end up with different results that that wouldn't be able to explain? Thanks, and sorry for being ignorant on this, Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs) 23:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I thought we'd discussed this one more than apparently we have.
 * Related threads I found just now:
 * Etymology_scriptorium/2023/November
 * Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Japonic/mi-
 * User_talk:荒巻モロゾフ/Syllable_table_of_Japanese_dialects
 * None of these threads include mention of how a Proto-level /i/ would presumably result in either 1) different following consonants or 2) different shifts in the initial consonant in Ryukyuan languages, but I feel certain that this was talked about at some point...
 * Going back over things at the moment, I'm not entirely sold on the reconstruction of /e/ here, even though this better aligns with Goguryeo terms. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kiril kovachev, @Eirikr: It is reconstructed as pR *mezu, whose traces can be seen in the Ryukyuan languages, which requires a reconstruction of pJ *mentu.
 * In most Amami dialects, including North Amami-Oshima (usually Yamatohama), the reconstructed *e typically changes to ï [ɨ] in certain environments, otherwise it syncopates (excluding absolute-initial position in many conditions), while in most Sakishima dialects except for Yonaguni, pR *e becomes i, otherwise it becomes ï [ɿ] or syncopates (also excluding absolute-initial position in many conditions). In Ie-jima, *mi becomes /ni/ but *me becomes /ni/, and in Ie-jima, we have mizi, not *nizi. In addition, pR *i would usually trigger progressive palatalization in some Northern Ryukyuan dialects; e.g. see pR, where progressive palatalization occurred in basically every North Ryukyuan dialect.
 * To demonstrate an example:
 * dialect - "road" - "water" - "rain" - "net"
 * Yamatohama - mitɕi - mɨdzɨ - ʔamɨ - ʔami
 * Ie-jima - nìtɕî - mìzî - ʔàmĭː - ʔànî
 * Irabu-Nakachi - mtsɿ - mizɿ - ami - am
 * 
 * Cheers! :) Chuterix (talk) 01:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Chuterix I see, this makes sense :) thanks for the explanation! Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs) 01:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Um, I think you might have a typo?
 * In Ie-jima, *mi becomes /ni/ but *me becomes /ni/,...
 * If they both become /ni/ there's no distinction? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is a typo. *mi becomes /ni/, but *me becomes /mi/. Thanks for noticing! :) Chuterix (talk) 21:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Cheers! :) Chuterix (talk) 01:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Chuterix I see, this makes sense :) thanks for the explanation! Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs) 01:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Um, I think you might have a typo?
 * In Ie-jima, *mi becomes /ni/ but *me becomes /ni/,...
 * If they both become /ni/ there's no distinction? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is a typo. *mi becomes /ni/, but *me becomes /mi/. Thanks for noticing! :) Chuterix (talk) 21:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)