Re: /s/ -> /h/ [was: Re: Betreft: Re: k(w)->p]
From: | <raccoon@...> |
Date: | Saturday, January 29, 2000, 7:17 |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Nik Taylor
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 10:47 PM
> To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> Subject: Re: /s/ -> /h/ [was: Re: Betreft: Re: k(w)->p]
>
>
> Raymond Brown wrote:
> > That, I believe, is the common understanding of these terms. It is what
> > I've understood for 40 years or so. In that analysis it simply does not
> > make sense to talk about voiceless approximants - as soon as these souns
> > are devoiced there is friction.
>
> I disagree. /j_0/ may have a VERY slight friction, but it's far less
> friction than /C/. Unless you want to come up with a new term to
> describe that difference, "weak fricative", perhaps?, voiceless
> aproximate is quite adequate.
>
> > this analysis regards, e.g. the [h] in [h&t] as the voiceless
> > equivalent of [&], and the [h] in [hIt] as the voiceless
> equivalent of [I],
> > etc. In such an analysis, of course, there are as many aitches
> as vowels,
> > each being, so to speak, a voiceless vowel, i.e. voiceless approximant.
>
> Actually, I quite agree with that analysis. I can find absolutely on
> friction in MY pronunciation of /h/, altho I have heard friction in some
> idiolects. To me, /h/ is a voiceless vowel, with allophones [I_0],
> [&_0], etc. I wonder if some of this debate arises from simply
> different linguists' idiolects?
Hmm. It always has, and still does, seem odd to me to conceive of /h/ as a
(semi)vowel, but if it in fact IS, that would make the laryngeal theory of
PIE make more sense. For those who don't know, it holds that there were
several (usually 3) different 'laryngeal' phonemes in Proto-Indo-European,
and each one has a vocalic and a non-vocalic allophone, much like /i/ and
/j/ were allophones in PIE. Further, each of the laryngeals has a different
effect on the vowels immediately before or after it; *H1e comes out like
*e, *H2e comes out like *a, and *H3e comes out like *o. So maybe *H1 was a
kind of /e/, *H2 a kind of /a/, and *H3 a kind of /o/. Still, I don't
understand what exactly separates vowels from consonants, and how /h/ could
be vocalic.
Eric Christopherson
raccoon@elknet.net