Re: A question on palatalization.
|Date:||Thursday, January 2, 2003, 13:33|
Muke Tever wrote:
>From: "Tristan" <kesuari@...>
>>>Well, I answered the point about Old English. In that case, /dZ/ is not
>>>orphan. As for the vowel inventory, on the other hand, I heartily agree with
>>>you. But it's not for nothing that the English vowel inventory is considered
>>>exceptional ;))) .
>>So what other examples of English's vowels' oddities are there? I
>>realise it's hard/impossible to generalise, but this is probably because
>>of the oddities. Speak of dialects you know! :)
>My favorite English vowel oddity is that (at least in Genam) only two or three
>vowels are able to cleanly end syllables or words: /A @ @`/. The rest all take
>offglides or ambisyllabicity.
>What's Genam? My dialect doesn't suffer that 'oddity' (is it really that
odd?) with all the long vowels, /0;/ (the only pure 'tense' vowel) and
/i;/ (which doesn't so much have an offglide as an onglide [@i;]) and
/@/ able to...
I guess an oddity of my English might be it has three unrounded high
vowels---/I/, /i;/ and /I:~I:@/ (bid, bead, beard), or perhapsfully the
fact that there's no/little front-centre-back symmetry. Is that odd?
>That has to be breaking a rule of some kind... >_<
>Of course it isn't! There's no rules languages have to abide by!
http://movies.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Movies
- What's on at your local cinema?