Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

YAEPT: apparently bizarre 'A's (was Re: YEAPT: f/T (was Re: Other Vulgar Latins?))

From:Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...>
Date:Wednesday, February 22, 2006, 2:58
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:12:07 -0500, Tristan Alexander McLeay
<conlang@...> wrote:

> On 22/02/06, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> wrote: >> On 2/21/06, Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...> wrote: >> > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:43:24 -0500, Keith Gaughan >> <kmgaughan@...> >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> half hearth >> > > >> > > I don't know any dialect of English where these two are a minimal >> pair, >> > > rhotic or non-rhotic. >> > >> > I have /hAf/ ~ /hAT/. In non-careful enough speech, I can have /A:f/ >> for >> > both of them. > > I'm not sure what the distinction you're trying to draw between /A:/ > and /A/ is, Paul. Could you elaborate, or is it just a typo/thinko?
One's long, the other's short. Maybe not canonically long vs short, but my sloppy lect includes long(er) vowels and my casual lect pretty much doesn't, as far as I can tell, at least not contrastively. R-colouring in my normal speech seems to be qualitative but not quantitative. Partial lengthening in my sloppy speech seems to be due to loss of initial /h/ in front of "rhoticized" vowels, whereas vowel-initial words get /?/. It's plausible the lengthening is subphonemic/allophonic in response to the lack of /?/. Casual: |hat| /hat/ vs |hart| /hAt/ vs |art| /At/ Sloppy: |hat| /at/ vs |hart| /A:t/ vs |art| /?At/ Warning: I'm not a phonologist, indeed I'm entirely not formally-trained. I'm just doing the best I can on short notice. Second Warning: My accent was a bastard (in the technical sense) to begin with (Milton Keynes native of Harrow stock, with plenty of time in rural Buckinghamshire). Transplanting it to North Carolina has probably not helped. Paul


Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...>
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>