Re: Other Vulgar Latins?

Philip Newton wrote:

> On 2/21/06, David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:
>> there probably aren't that many minimal
>> pairs with [f] and [T]
>
> http://www.marlodge.supanet.com/wordlist/FINTHIN.txt lists:
>
> 50 pairs making 38 semantic contrasts
If somebody's interested in a neighbouring dialect that differs in some
places, here's some transcriptions and comments. /T/ can be read as [T]
or [t_d]:

> firm therm
/frm/ (syllabic 'r') /TErm/

> feoff thief
Fief?

> ford thawed
/fOrd/ /TA:d/

> faun thorn
/fA:n/ /TOrn/

> forts thoughts
/fOrts/ /TA:ts/ or /t_dA:ts/

> fours thaws
...you get the idea...

> half hearth
I don't know any dialect of English where these two are a minimal pair,
rhotic or non-rhotic.

> infuse enthuse
Ditto. [I] vs. [E].

> sheaf sheath
[f] vs. [D]. A minimal pair, but now [T] -> [f].

K.

Replies