Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: more English orthography

From:Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
Date:Wednesday, May 17, 2000, 23:52
Roger Mills wrote:
> Ah me, times do change! Nik's definition is also the one I > learned-- pretty much "Classical (American) Phonemics" as it was > Pre-Chomsky. It's still a useful tool for beginning analysis, and still > works for some languages, like Spanish;
I'd just like to add that I agree that that theory is not perfect. I realize that my post may have sounded that way. However, for MY idiolect, I'm not entirely convinced that there's ANY difference between [V] and [@] beyond stress. And apparently not just my idiolect, I've heard others call [V] and [@]
> but it could not handle neutralization.
Some kinds it can handle pretty well, like when German collapses /d/ and /t/ into [t] word-finally, it could be considered a case of the phoneme /d/ becoming /t/. But, of course, in cases like Japanese /d/ and /z/, which become /dz/ (NOT /dZ/) before /u/ it fails.
> also [tSa] occurs IIRC.
/tS/ and /dZ/ can occur before any vowel except /e/, and are therefore phonemes, since a contrast can exist between /ta/ and /tSa/, for instance. Looking in my Japanese-English dictionary, I found a minimal pair quite quickly - cha ("tea") and ta ("rice field") -- "If the stars should appear one night in a thousand years, how would men believe and adore, and preserve for many generations the remembrance of the city of God!" - Ralph Waldo Emerson "Glassín wafilái pigasyúv táv pifyániivav nadusakyáavav sussyáiyatantu wawailáv ku suslawayástantu ku usfunufilpyasváditanva wafpatilikániv wafluwáiv suttakíi wakinakatáli tiDikáufli!" - nLáf mÁldu nÍmasun ICQ: 18656696 AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor