title_body: What setting for the dropoff rate in a language generator will produce a natural English phoneme distribution? In creating an ancestral lang for a hard-fantasy world that is based on the language of your home, you first have to understand that language.  And for an impatient worldbuilder like me, the Vulgar Language Generator seems the best place to go.  Click the "English" choice, and you automatically get the following consonant clusters:
  
  Word initial:  b bɹ d dj ʤ f fj fɹ h j k kj kw kɹ l m n nj p pl pɹ s sm sp st t tɹ ʧ v w ð g gɹ ɹ ʃ ʍ θ θɹ
  
  Mid-word:  b bl d f ft fɹ h k l ldɹ lm ls lw lɹ m mb ms mθ n nd ndɹ nl ns nt ntɹ nɹ p pl s st sʧ t ts tw ʧ v w z zn ð ŋgl g ɹ θ
  
  Word final:  b d dz ʤ f ft k ks kst kt l ld lf lp lt lvz m md mz n nd ndz nst nt nʧ nz p ps pt s skt st t ts ʧ v vd z ð ŋ ŋk ŋz g ɹ ʃ θ
  
  Vowels:  aɪ aʊ eɪ i iə iː oː u uː æ ɑː ɒ ɔ ɔɪ ɔː ə əʊ ɛ ɛː ɜː ɪ ɪə ʊə ʌ ʊ
  
  And there are some things in English that came naturally before knowing about it, like affixes, sound-verb-object and adjective before noun.
  
  However, there are some things about English that I know nothing about, like its dropoff rate.  Vulgar defined dropoff rate as follows:
  
  
    Phonemes are ranked by frequency from left (most frequent) to right (least frequent). Medium makes the frequencies slightly more even than fast. When using equiprobable, phonemes can be custom weighted by writing =multiplier, eg: p=10 makes p ten times more common than a phoneme without a weighting.
  
  
  Vulgar gives us choices for our phonemes:  "fast", "medium" or "equiprobable" for dropoff rate and "naturalistic ranking", "natural with randomness", "alphabetical" or "previous" for how to arrange the phonemes.  Which of these choices matches English in real life?
upvoted_answer: Note that by synthesising vocabulary using a tool like Vulgar Lang, you will not even approximate English even when using the same distributional laws for phonemes. You will get a lot of words that could be English, but are just unused, you get known words but with other meanings, and you don't get morphology or syntax at all.
  
  Of course, "naturalistic ranking" is the best approximation, all other rankings lead to feelable statistical distortions given your conlang an engeneered touch.
  
  As an alternative I suggest looking at the questions and answers under diachronics: Start with real life English and apply systematic changes to the sounds and the grammar. For an example using projection of current trends into the future, you can look at Futurese.