Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: I need an artist ::: and articles

From:Raymond A. Brown <raybrown@...>
Date:Thursday, January 21, 1999, 20:32
At 2:51 pm -0500 20/1/99, John Cowan wrote:
>Raymond A. Brown wrote: > >> I'm wondering if we should not only accept the [E@] analysis of 'hair' but >> also analyze 'part' as [pA@t] and 'saw' as [sO@]. > >Is this meant to be phonetic, or phonemic?
Phonemic - sorry I should've used slashes, not square brackets :=(
> >In a non-rhotic American dialect I'm familiar with (but don't >speak), [sO] = saw, but [sO@] = soar.
Both tend are practically the same in non-rhotic varieties of Brit.English. 'Noah' is usually pronounced /'nou@/ or /'nVu@/ here, but one does come across [nO:]
>I've never heard >anyone say [pa@t] and would probably hear it as an extreme >non-rhotic version of "parrot".
Indeed, I guess you would. I was thinking of south German speakers I've come across who habitually give post-vocalic -r the sound /@/ or/a/, so that, e.g.. 'mir' = /mIa/ (one syllable). Final -ar becomes very open [A:]. Again I should've written /'pa@t/ Ray.