Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: more English orthography

From:Marcus Smith <smithma@...>
Date:Wednesday, May 17, 2000, 7:08
Nik Tailor wrote:

>Well, that may be true in your dialect, but I did specify "in my >dialect", [@] and [V] are in complimentary distribution, and they are >phonetically similar, that's the definition of allophone I learned. >Yes, all lax vowels can become /@/, but isn't that simply phonemic >neutralization, as in the German phenomenon of voiced consonants >devoicing word-finally?
I'm sorry. I don't see the difference between allophony and phonemic neutralization in this context. I would certainly say that devoiced final consonants are allophones of the voiced phoneme in German.
>> That basic point still stands, that I don't see how we could find an >> underlying >> pronunciation for the schwa in "comma." It may be best to consider it a >> phoneme. I just don't know how to test that. > >Of course schwa is a phoneme, I don't think anyone's said it wasn't.
If you look back at why this part of the thread started, it was because a phoneme list for English did not include schwa. I was merely pointing out that it probably could be considered a phoneme, but it isn't at all obvious. I do know phonologists who claim schwa is not a phoneme of English, but I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. Marcus