Omaha nasal vowels

[Koontz John E]

On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 Ogalala2 at aol.com wrote:

> Will the Dhegihans please give me their take on Omaha nasal vowels.  Dorsey
> had two:  an and in.  La Flesche also had two:  in and on.  Which pair is the
> one you accept.  Could there be three: an, in, and on?  Thanks for your help.

The Dorsey aN and the LaFlesche oN are alternative notations for the same
thing. There is, however, the possibility that this single orthographic
vowel covers an aN : oN (i.e., uN) contrast.

It is a bit confusing that Dorsey's aN (a + raised n, a + enye, a + n, a
after some m and n, and a + m in some contexts) and LaFlesche's oN
(o-raised n), each set of graphemes conceptually covering a single vowel,
should potentially cover two contrasting vowels which would probably be
written with some representation of aN and oN, but that's just the
historical breaks.

Neither Dorsey nor LaFlesche have any formal conception of a contrastive
phoneme or generative segment, but it seems clear that neither
distinguished more than one central/back nasal vowel, even though they
chose different symbols to represent this single entity.  Dorsey's
variants are motivated by the following sound (enye representing eng
before velars, etc.). LaFlesche just writes vowel + raised n in all
contexts, though sometimes omitting the raised n if the vowel follows m or
n.  In that case he may write a instead of o.  He also sometimes produces
something like u + raised n, which from the contexts I take to be either
earlier use on his part or Fletcher-influenced lack of systematic
orthography.

JEK