I was pleased to learn, via a thread at Tenser, said the Tensor, that a lack of fricatives or affricates is "virtually universal for all Australian languages, of all families." Furthermore, the phenomenon is almost entirely limited to Australia and the adjacent regions; the list given by The Tensor (created from the UCLA Phonological Segment Inventory Database) has only two outliers (AUCA: S. American, Andean; DINKA: Nilo-Saharan, Eastern Sudanic, Nilotic, Dinka-Nuer); as he says, "That's an areal feature if I've ever seen one." And yet another rebuttal to the universalists (who used to claim that all languages have fricatives).
Posted by languagehat at April 27, 2004 12:04 PMFor some more information about Australian languages, check out this page for some more details. The phonology of Australian languages is very interesting, with 6 way nasal distinctions and no voicing contrast. One wonders what our theories of phonology would look like if we hadn't lost so many of them...
Posted by: joe tomei at April 28, 2004 05:11 AMYet another rebuttal to the universalists (who used to claim that all languages have fricatives).
Sign language must have come as a bit of shock, then?
Posted by: des at April 28, 2004 07:14 AMSome Australian languages have fricatives. Kala Lagaw Ya has the word kwasarr for 2 (
One of the Warluwarric languages has a velar fricative (but no s) - this is my all-time favourite system.
Voicing contrasts aren't quite as rare. They're there in many Karnic languages from Central Australia, and the Top End has a geminate/singleton distinction which also involves voicing.
Posted by: Claire at April 29, 2004 12:06 AM