Most Afro-Asiatic dialects share a set, or stock, of specific consonants. One gathering in this stock is known as the pharyngeal fricatives and is exemplified in Egyptian, Cushion, Amazing, and Semitic by ħ and ʿ (“ayn”). A moment usually utilized gathering of consonants is an unequivocal set, like the pharyngeal fricatives yet with phonetically very extraordinary enunciation; naturally, emphatic s are framed further down in the vocal tract and may include distinctive air stream components.
Amazigh and Afro-Asiatic have three noteworthy sorts of consonants: pharyngealized (verbalized at the back of the vocal tract with the pharynx), velarized (in which the back of the tongue touches the delicate sense of taste), and uvularized (enunciated at the back of the vocal tract with the uvula). In South Arabian, Ethio-Semitic, Cushitic, and Chadic dialects, there are consonants described by the accompanying “behavior,” or sorts of wind current: unstable glottals, which happen when a total conclusion is all of a sudden discharged; ejective glottals, which include compacted air moving from the glottis and toward the lips; and implosive glottals, which include air moving incidentally into the oral cavity before the arrival of the glottal conclusion enables the air from the lungs to stream out once more. The glottal stop ʾ (“hamzah”) is utilized as a different consonant. Though the semivowels y (IPA: j) and w tend additionally to be utilized as consonants, consonants, for example, ʾ and *H̥ indicate utilitarian affinities with vowels.
Reproductions in light of Semitic and Cushitic alone point toward an adjusted stock of three short vowels (*i, *u, and *a) and three long vowels (*ii, *uu, and *aa). This, in any case, is probably not going to have been the situation in the protolanguage; rather, in light of Chadic and Amazigh information and a more unique level of phonological examination, a two-vowel framework (*a, *ə) seems more probable there.
A few phonemes, for example, *y, *w, *ʾ, and *H̥, seem to serve both as consonants (called “frail radicals” when they shape some portion of a root) and as vowels (in which case they move toward becoming *i, *u, and *a), contingent upon their conveyance in the root or word. Possibly, Proto-Afro-Asiatic did not have a vowel framework in the conventional sense however may have recognized consonants and sonants rather; cases of sonants would have been, for example, *m, *n, *r, *l, *y, *w, *ʾ, *H̥, and *H̥w, which could play out the elements of either consonants or vowels. As vowels they offered ascend to *i, *u, and *a and groupings, for example, *am, *an, *ar, *al, *ai, *au, and *ʾa in the dialects talked today.
The larger part of Afro-Asiatic dialects are tone dialects, implying that notwithstanding consonants and vowels, the pitch of the voice is utilized to separate between words or littler significant units. The utilization of tones is confirmed in Chadic, Cushitic, and Omotic however in neither Semitic nor Amazigh. In some Cushitic and Omotic dialects, in any case, tonality looks like pitch complement, an etymological element to some degree similar to worry in European dialects, though depending entirely on higher pitch for “focused on” syllables instead of naturally consolidating higher pitch with commotion or span. A few etymologists trust that Proto-Afro-Asiatic was a tone dialect and that girl dialects, for example, Semitic, Amazigh, and conceivably Egyptian in this manner lost every single tonal qualification. Different creators expect Proto-Afro-Asiatic was a pitch-emphasize dialect; these language specialists think of it as more probable that tonality rose autonomously in Chadic, Cushitic, and Omotic, accepting that tonal qualifications, in any event in Chadic, created out of the pitch-highlight arrangement of Proto-Afro-Asiatic in conjunction with the pitch-bringing down impact of certain syllable-starting consonants called tonal depressors. Such programmed pitch bringing down is very much verified outside Chadic both inside and outside Africa. Along these lines, long stretches of contact with speakers of honest to goodness African tone dialects of Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan stock may have helped the verifiable move from contribute highlight to tone frameworks Afro-Asiatic.
Afro-Asiatic dialects are portrayed by a “root and example” framework in which the fundamental importance of a word is showed in the consonants alone. The succession of vowels, which is known as the example, includes syntactic data and may adjust the fundamental lexical significance of the root, here and there in blend with prefixes or additions. The root k-t-b-, which signifies ‘compose’ in Arabic, gives enlightening illustrations: including the vowel design – an a yields the frame kataba ‘he has composed,’ while the zero-beginning example Ø-u(- Ø) in addition to the prefix ya-and the postfix – u yields ya-ktub-u ‘he is composing.’