Re: THEORY: counterpick (was: Re: THEORY: picking nits)

On Sun, 27 Jun 1999, Matt Pearson wrote:

> Dirk Elzinga wrote:
>
> >Actually, 'twoib' is not a possible English syllable. Consider: words
> >which begin with [tw] cannot have a round vowel following (we pronounce
> >'two' as [tu], after all, and get rid of that [w]), and the only
> >consonants allowed following the diphthongs [oi] and [aw] are alveolar;
> >they can never be of any other place of articulation. So 'twib' would be
> >a fine English word, or even 'toin', but never 'twoib'. [Caveat lector:
> >the forgoing information is my recollection of an English phonology
> >seminar I participated in about 3 years ago; counterexamples are
> >probable and welcome!]
>
> Well, there's "oink", "boink", and "zoinks", which have [oi] followed by
> a velar nasal.  Granted, "oink" is (allegedly) onomatopoetic and "boink"
> and "zoinks" are pretty slangy, but they're still valid English words.
Thanks. These would be genuine counterexamples, as far as I'm concerned.
Because they are neologisms and onomatopoeia, some might argue that
they really don't count, and that the generalization still stands. I
don't know that I'd take that position, though. However, I still am
deeply suspicious of [oib] as a possible syllable rhyme ...

Dirk

--
Dirk Elzinga
dirk.elzinga@m.cc.utah.edu                   "All grammars leak."
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~elzinga/                 -Edward Sapir