Re: USAGE: [YAEPT] (was Re: "To whom")

On 27 Jan 2005, at 1.29 am, Mark J. Reed wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:58:44PM +1100, Tristan McLeay wrote:
>> I voiced my /t/ then, but it might not. I know that when I was in
>> the middle of high school (yr 9ish),
>
> School year 9 is the middle of high school for you?  That's the first
> year of high school here - in some cases the last year before high
> school.
Yes, in Victoria we have primary school, grade prep then grade one to
grade six, and secondary school, year seven to year twelve (grades one
to six are often called years one to six, and grade prep is normally
called 'prep'). Secondary school is colloquially known as high school.
Some states start high school at year eight or nine though which is how
Victoria used to do it a long time ago (but instead of being called
years nine to twelve, they were called forms three to six... presumably
the last years of primary school were also called forms one and two at
that time... or such is my understanding, and it may well be confused).

(The fact that there's a grade prep before grade one means that year 9
is the 10th year of school, btw.)

I though went to two high schools, one for year seven and eight and
another from year nine onwards: the latter took pride in being the
oldest state (public) secondary school in Victoria, and was set in its
ways. Also, starting at yr 9 meant it could have more students in each
year level, so it was more likely to have higher ENTERs and could
compete better against expensive private schools (marks you get at the
end of year 12 primarily to determine what uni courses you can get
into).

(Kinder is not a part of formal education, but is a colloquial name for
what normally call themselves pre-schools.)

>> * I also realised at a similar time that when I noticed that I
>> pronounced el (e.g. in elementary) as [&l],
>
> Ah, yes, alimentary school.
>
>> I'd stopped doing that, and started saying [el].
>
> [el]?  Not [El]?
Well, Roger Mills reckons my /&/ sounds more like [E] in the first
place :) (Listening to IPA samples on the web sometimes confirms that
and sometimes doesn't ... it's a pity I don't know *which* samples
actually (semi-)accurately render the cardinal vowels, though I have my
doubts about the one that pronounces [9] as [r\=].)

>> I say /k&iS/ (i.e. caish), but that's a spelling pronunciation.
>
> Indeed?  Is it not a common word Down Under?
Not amongst my peers at the age I learnt it, which was from web
browsers when I was in late primary or early secondary school. I've
heard it since, but most frequently in the context of web browsers. I
spose it isn't a particularly common word.

>> I tried a number of pronunciations before I settled on that one, but
>> I'm almost certain it's the only pronunciation of heard.
>
> Was that an intentional example of the "treat any /@v/ as |of|"
> phenomenon? :)
No, it's an unintentional example of what happens when you're
physically active out in the sun for a few hours in 30+ degree heat.
(It was Australia Day yesterday/26th Jan.)

Muke Tever is responsible for:
> Tristan McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:
>> I don't know that the glottal stop is phonemic (and I've heard
>> evidence
>> that the phoneme for US [4] is actually /t/, so 'meddle' and 'mettle'
>> are both homophones as (what I suppose is) /mEtl=/, contrary to
>> intuition).
>
> What's the evidence for making it /t/?  Usually it's described as part
> of the /d/ phoneme, as they still contrast before /n=/:
>     mitten /mItn=/ (probably [mIt_}n=] or [mi?n=])
>     midden /mIdn=/ (maybe [mi4n=], but probably [mId_}n=])
Well, personally I think I usually pronounce those the same, but I
don't speak American English so it's not really relevant :) (In any
case, I tend to pronounce syllabic consonants as [@C] (where C is the
consonant, so there's plenty of space to avoid a glottal stop ... but
sometimes the schwa disappears before a vowel, as in
[tSr&v@l]~[tSr&vlIN] for 'travel~travelling'.)

Let me scour the Internet... I think I've heard something else before,
but I have this:
   http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001819.html
not really proper, scientific evidence but still at least an argument
or two. I'm not sure if the authors of such things consider words like
'mitten'.



--
Tristan.

Reply