Re: Pronunciation keys
|From:||Benct Philip Jonsson <conlang@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, February 1, 2007, 11:40|
T. A. McLeay skrev:
> On 1/31/07, Benct Philip Jonsson
> <conlang@...> wrote:
>> in uterque sensu
>> (12) _U_ for /w/ is preferable to _o_ since we don't want
>> 'wolf' _uolf_, 'would'-'wood' _uodd_, 'woman'
>> _uOmman_, 'wound' _uOnd_ to become [ulf], [ud],
>> ['uman], [und]. We may get [wolf] etc., but that's
>> IMO less grave.
> Personally, considering the vowel is actually /U/ or /u:/,
> I would've thought that the first group would've been less
> grave, particularly if they treat them as starting with a
> consonant (and hence say /@ und/ and not /@n und/ for 'a
> wound')... Altho I suppose it depends on how high the /o/
> is and who they're meant to sound native to.
The /o/ is quite high for many Swedes, and in addition 'over-
rounded' in comparison to e.g. /o/ in French or Italian,
making it sound even higher than it is. Moreover _oulf,
ound_ may also be read as [u8lf u8nd] by a naive Swedish
reader, and I think you agree that we don't want that. There
are several reasons to prefer _u_ for /w/, including that it
has a much stronger [B_o] offglide for most Swedes -- cf.
how _paus_ is often realized as [paB_os], but _kaos_ AFAIK
never becomes **[kaB_os].
However there is one factor that actually speaks in favor of
_ou_, namely that _uo_ may get read as [8u], which I didn't
think of before.
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
"Ge dig, Jedi!"
-- A Sith from Gothenburg