Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: more English orthography

From:Herman Miller <hmiller@...>
Date:Thursday, May 18, 2000, 2:56
On Wed, 17 May 2000 16:02:49 -0400, Roger Mills <romilly@...> wrote:

>>Nik Tailor wrote: >>>I suppose it depends on which definition you use of "phoneme". The >>>definitions I learned and use do not allow two phonemes to share an >>>allophone (at least in the same environment). >> >Marcus Smith replied: >>That is a definition I haven't heard before.> > > 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; but it could not handle >neutralization. Theoretically, you were supposed to be be able to deduce >Phonemics from Phonetics, _and vice-versa_......
Yes, that's also the system as I learned it. That's why I described Jarrda spelling as morphophonemic rather than phonemic. (by the way, I'm leaning toward "gy", as in "Magyar", to spell the [J\] sound, which would change the language's name to Gyarrda.) But I might as well consider it a phonemic spelling, according to the new definition, since assimilation and devoicing are the only reasons it wouldn't be considered phonemic under the old definition. -- languages of Azir------> ----<>--- h i l r i . o "If all Printers were determin'd not to print any m l e @ o c m thing till they were sure it would offend no body, (Herman Miller) there would be very little printed." -Ben Franklin