Re: Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)

Quoting Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>:

> >(Though it
> >omits the w/wh distinction that some people make, or the horse/hoarse
> >one.)
>
> One pf the problems with trying to achieve a phonemically written form of a
> global language like English.  If we try to encode all the phonemic
> differentiations of every variety of English, the result would probably be
> confusing.  Tho the w/wh might be worth keeping, I think most English would
> probably wonder what the difference between 'hoarse' and 'horse' is.
Although, if you think about it, most of the minimal pairs for
/hw/ : /w/ are actually quite functionally distinct from one
another, and so it's be no wonder that the distinction is
lost in a great many dialects. Just consider:  "whale : wail"
(a noun and a verb), "white : wight" (an adjective and [an
obsolescent] noun), "which : witch" (a relative/interrogative
pronoun and a noun), "whether : weather" (a subordinating
conjunction and a noun), etc.  All of these words have quite
different distributions in the syntax.

Still, I love /hw/ since it reminds me of Beowulf: "Hwæt!
We gar-Dena in geardagum..."

=====================================================================
Thomas Wier          "...koruphàs hetéras hetére:isi prosápto:n /
Dept. of Linguistics  mú:tho:n mè: teléein atrapòn mían..."
University of Chicago "To join together diverse peaks of thought /
1010 E. 59th Street   and not complete one road that has no turn"
Chicago, IL 60637     Empedocles, _On Nature_, on speculative thinkers