Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: more English orthography

From:nicole perrin <nicole.eap@...>
Date:Thursday, May 18, 2000, 20:27
Roger Mills wrote:
> > Nik Taylor wrote: > >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 [@]> > Same here, if I assume correctly that [V] means "upside down v", as in > _cup, but(t), slut etc. Thinking about this over the last few days, I've > come to suspect that ALL instances of Engl. final open syllable /@/ e.g. > sofa, drama, Alabama etc. are non-native, hence, in the absence of written > forms, we would have no idea whatever about the underlying vowel. > The schwa in 3d sing/noun pl. /-@z/ is often higher -- all the way to > barred i-- for some, accounting for such near minimal pairs as /j@st/ or > /jVst/ 'just (adj.)' vs. ?/ji-st/ 'just (adv).' Some claim the same contrast > for _Rosa's_ vs. _roses_.
Interesting, I have the exact same pronunciation of just the adv and just the adj -- both are /dZVst/ -- no contrast there whatsoever. But "Rosa's" and "roses" are absolutely completely different. Rosa's has schwa while roses has the barred-i. Nicole