A bit more detailed analysis of the phonology of my east norse dialect. As always, as I am not a professional linguist/phonologist, the transcriptions should not be taken as truly accurate. I also favour single character over using a bunch of diacritics, so some characters have somewhat shifted its place — as there are no ambiguities it shouldn't be a problem. Now if only I could get myself to buy a microphone and start recording all the sounds.
Something more readable: wip-phonology-2012-03-23.pdf (version 4)
|high||ɪʲː, ɪː4,5–||–ʏᶣː, ʏː4||–ɵᵝː||–ʊᵝː, ʊː4|
|fricative||f–v6||s, ɕ–ʑ7||ʂ, ɧ8–(ɧ9)||(x10)–ʝ11|
|approximant||–ʋ, β12||–ɹ||–ɻ13||–j14, (ɣ15/ɥ16)|
|fricative||fː–vː6||sː, ɕː–ʑː7||ʂː, ɧː8–(ɧː9)||(xː10)–|
Like in many languages, the [ɦ]-sound does not have a true place of articulation, and is actually bare phonation. Its manner of articulation is primarily voiced approximant (though it might have a fricative or voiceless allophone), and is traditionally treated as glottal. There is also a nonphonemic glottal stop [ʔ], however, due to the linking — words, and even sentences, are pronounced without any word-medial pauses — and elisive — omission of sounds to make pronounciation easier or more aesthetic — nature, the glottal stop is relatively rare. An uninterrupted flow with few stops or pauses is favoured. It can, however, be found at the start of sentences that begin with a vowel, or any other place in a larger text where there is a natural pause before a vowel — although even here it can be ommitted in favour of a soft onset — or also sometimes when using emphasis. The most common occurence is when speaking very clearly to emphasise the words and their spelling, e.g. when helping a non-native speaker. The [ɦ]-sound can be long, but the glottal stop is always short.
Phonomorphemic words — similar to English wow and shh — use several sounds not otherwise found in native speech, such as clicks, ingressive phonation (inhaled), and bilabial fricatives.