<p>Well, you need to add numbers of speakers from another source (e.g. Wikipedia or Ethnologue, or some other list with speaker estimates). Pro-tip: Use a list where the languages are ordered by the number of speakers. You can use a cut-off (no matter whether you choose 10k or 100k speakers) and set that cut-off for the number of speakers (in statistical lingo, this kind of adjustment is termed <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoothing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">smoothing</a>). This frees you from looking up the numbers for languages with fewer speakers.</p>
<p>Be aware of the following: By weighing the languages by the numbers of their speakers you are putting a bias into your language design, heavily favouring Mandarin, English and Hindi/Urdu over the rest of the languages. This kind of bias may be or may not be a good thing in your conlang.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-07T10:45:43.907Z
2022-02-07T10:45:43.907Z
Sir Cornflakes
<p>All consonants in 50% or more languages:</p>
<p>m, k, j, p, w, n, t, l, s, b, ŋ, g, h</p>
<p>All vowels in 50% or more languages:</p>
<p>i, u, a, e, o</p>
<p>I hope this answers your question</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-08T12:43:58.570Z
OP asked about segments based on how many people use them, not how many languages use them, so the question is not answered at all.
Cecilia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-07T05:28:49.167Z
2022-02-07T05:28:49.167Z
user4144
<p>The great <a href="https://phoible.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Phoible 2.0</a> has exclusive list of segment usages based on &quot;Languages&quot;, but since some languages such as <a href="https://phoible.org/languages/lakk1252" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Lak</a> are only used by handful of people, it won't make any sense if I employ their pronunciations/segments in the language I'm creating , is it?</p>
<p>For example, /k͈ʷ/ sounds are ONLY used in Lak, this sounds would definitely not recommended to be put into my collection of alphabets of my language.</p>
<p>After all, what's the point of making a language if &quot;only handful of people in the whole Earth knows how to pronounce it correctly&quot;!?</p>
<p>And, English and Japanese are both count as &quot;one&quot; language, but we can't never deny the fact that &quot;English speaker&quot; is WAY~ more then &quot;Japanese speaker&quot;!</p>
<p>(~400M native speaker against ~128M according to Wiki)</p>
<p>So, if I choose some sounds that &quot;only&quot; English speakers knows how to pronounce over some &quot;Japanese-only&quot; sounds, you could bet that there are about 272M more people knows how to pronounce that sound correctly.</p>
<p>So, I was wondering if there is some other &quot;outstanding&quot; list out there based their list on &quot;the amount of people using it&quot;?</p>
<p>Much appreciated!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-18T09:54:12.483Z
I’m honestly really confused about what you mean when you refer to ‘employ[ing another] language in mine’ — could you clarify this point please? As far as I’m aware, languages can’t really ‘contain’ other languages in any meaningful way. (Another point: just because Lak has few speakers, that doesn’t mean that non-speakers can’t pronounce it correctly — to give but one example, I (a monolingual English speaker) can pronounce a Lak text more or less correctly, if given in phonetic transcription.)
bradrn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-18T10:24:21.503Z
@bradrn I had updated my question, hope it helps.
PiggyChu001
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-18T12:03:02.273Z
Thanks @PiggyChu001! I feel that a big part of your problem is that you are running into PHOIBLE’s inadequacies (which are sadly many, so always take it with a huge grain of salt). For instance, your example of /k͈ʷ/ is not actually a sound unique to Lak: it is a perfectly ordinary phoneme found in many other languages as well. However, the person who input the Lak inventory into PHOIBLE decided to transcribe it using a non-standard diacritic for ‘fortis’; no other person has used this exact diacritic, resulting in PHOIBLE reporting it unique. PHOIBLE contains many other such inconsistencies.
bradrn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-19T05:44:32.673Z
@bradrn Wow, I didn't know that! Thanks for your information! Then where could I get more "consistent and accurate" list?
PiggyChu001
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-19T06:22:56.733Z
Sadly, I know of none. Any large list of languages like PHOIBLE will run into exactly the same issues. (For instance, [WALS](https://wals.info/) is a similarly useful database with similar inaccuracies, though it’s a bit better than PHOIBLE.) However, there are a couple of things you can do to get more accurate results. A good thing to do is to double-check with another source, such as a reference grammar or even Wikipedia (though that one can also be inaccurate) — this reveals, for instance, that Lak has /kʷ kːʷ kʷʼ/, but no /k͈ʷ/. …
bradrn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-19T06:22:59.947Z
… Also, if PHOIBLE lists a segment with strange diacritics or otherwise unusual transcription, or a segment which _seems_ straightforward but is only in very few languages, that can be a sign you need to investigate it further. To give another example, [/ⁿd/](https://phoible.org/parameters/86DD56EA735C71F39ED477D66E5B424A#5/25.559/92.475) is apparently attested in 23 languages — but only because PHOIBLE usually transcribes this phoneme as [/nd/](https://phoible.org/parameters/6910328C2AAA6011720FA21FFE1665D8#2/3.1/151.1), present in 270 languages.
bradrn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-01-19T06:34:46.223Z
@bradrn OK, thanks trillion for your help! I'll do my best! :)
PiggyChu001
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-03-06T19:59:46.427Z
Assuming that it's possible to 'normalize' the segment representations at all, you could generate the list you're interested fairly easily by joining (database theory term) the normalized segment list with a list of languages and the count of their speakers.
Jeff Zeitlin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-07T14:22:38.083Z
it's also worth considering explicitly what your goals with your conlang are. There's no reason a priori that you shouldn't use an unusual phoneme. After all, Classical Arabic's /ɮˁ/ is almost unique and it certainly existed, and even without irl examples, not all conlangs need to be naturalistic, or even pronounceable by humans
Tristan
<conlang-creation><list-of-languages>
List of segment usage based on how many people use it?
# List of segment usage based on how many people use it?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-01-18)

The great [Phoible 2.0](https://phoible.org/) has exclusive list of segment usages based on "Languages", but since some languages such as [Lak](https://phoible.org/languages/lakk1252) are only used by handful of people, it won't make any sense if I employ their pronunciations/segments in the language I'm creating , is it?

For example, /k͈ʷ/ sounds are ONLY used in Lak, this sounds would definitely not recommended to be put into my collection of alphabets of my language.

After all, what's the point of making a language if "only handful of people in the whole Earth knows how to pronounce it correctly"!?

And, English and Japanese are both count as "one" language, but we can't never deny the fact that "English speaker" is WAY~ more then "Japanese speaker"!

(~400M native speaker against ~128M according to Wiki)

So, if I choose some sounds that "only" English speakers knows how to pronounce over some "Japanese-only" sounds, you could bet that there are about 272M more people knows how to pronounce that sound correctly.

So, I was wondering if there is some other "outstanding" list out there based their list on "the amount of people using it"?

Much appreciated!

**Tags:** conlang-creation, list-of-languages

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I’m honestly really confused about what you mean when you refer to ‘employ[ing another] language in mine’ — could you clarify this point please? As far as I’m aware, languages can’t really ‘contain’ other languages in any meaningful way. (Another point: just because Lak has few speakers, that doesn’t mean that non-speakers can’t pronounce it correctly — to give but one example, I (a monolingual English speaker) can pronounce a Lak text more or less correctly, if given in phonetic transcription.)  
> **username_0**: @username_1 I had updated my question, hope it helps.  
> **username_1**: Thanks @username_0! I feel that a big part of your problem is that you are running into PHOIBLE’s inadequacies (which are sadly many, so always take it with a huge grain of salt). For instance, your example of /k͈ʷ/ is not actually a sound unique to Lak: it is a perfectly ordinary phoneme found in many other languages as well. However, the person who input the Lak inventory into PHOIBLE decided to transcribe it using a non-standard diacritic for ‘fortis’; no other person has used this exact diacritic, resulting in PHOIBLE reporting it unique. PHOIBLE contains many other such inconsistencies.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 Wow, I didn't know that! Thanks for your information! Then where could I get more "consistent and accurate" list?  
> **username_1**: Sadly, I know of none. Any large list of languages like PHOIBLE will run into exactly the same issues. (For instance, [WALS](https://wals.info/) is a similarly useful database with similar inaccuracies, though it’s a bit better than PHOIBLE.) However, there are a couple of things you can do to get more accurate results. A good thing to do is to double-check with another source, such as a reference grammar or even Wikipedia (though that one can also be inaccurate) — this reveals, for instance, that Lak has /kʷ kːʷ kʷʼ/, but no /k͈ʷ/. …  
> **username_1**: … Also, if PHOIBLE lists a segment with strange diacritics or otherwise unusual transcription, or a segment which _seems_ straightforward but is only in very few languages, that can be a sign you need to investigate it further. To give another example, [/ⁿd/](https://phoible.org/parameters/86DD56EA735C71F39ED477D66E5B424A#5/25.559/92.475) is apparently attested in 23 languages — but only because PHOIBLE usually transcribes this phoneme as [/nd/](https://phoible.org/parameters/6910328C2AAA6011720FA21FFE1665D8#2/3.1/151.1), present in 270 languages.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 OK, thanks trillion for your help! I'll do my best! :)  
> **username_2**: Assuming that it's possible to 'normalize' the segment representations at all, you could generate the list you're interested fairly easily by joining (database theory term) the normalized segment list with a list of languages and the count of their speakers.  
> **username_3**: it's also worth considering explicitly what your goals with your conlang are. There's no reason a priori that you shouldn't use an unusual phoneme. After all, Classical Arabic's /ɮˁ/ is almost unique and it certainly existed, and even without irl examples, not all conlangs need to be naturalistic, or even pronounceable by humans  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2022-02-07. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Well, you need to add numbers of speakers from another source (e.g. Wikipedia or Ethnologue, or some other list with speaker estimates). Pro-tip: Use a list where the languages are ordered by the number of speakers. You can use a cut-off (no matter whether you choose 10k or 100k speakers) and set that cut-off for the number of speakers (in statistical lingo, this kind of adjustment is termed [smoothing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoothing)). This frees you from looking up the numbers for languages with fewer speakers.

Be aware of the following: By weighing the languages by the numbers of their speakers you are putting a bias into your language design, heavily favouring Mandarin, English and Hindi/Urdu over the rest of the languages. This kind of bias may be or may not be a good thing in your conlang.


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-02-07. Score: 1

All consonants in 50% or more languages:

m, k, j, p, w, n, t, l, s, b, ŋ, g, h

All vowels in 50% or more languages:

i, u, a, e, o

I hope this answers your question

> **Comments:**
> **username_6**: OP asked about segments based on how many people use them, not how many languages use them, so the question is not answered at all.  

---

