Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: THEORY: Allophones

From:Ed Heil <edheil@...>
Date:Monday, June 21, 1999, 21:40
That is ENTIRELY dependent on which theory of phonology you personally
happen to hold.  Either, or both, if you like.

+ Ed Heil ---------------------- +
|    "What matter that you understood no word!       |
|    Doubtless I spoke or sang what I had heard      |
|           In broken sentences."  --Yeats           |

FFlores wrote:

> I know we discussed this before, but I have a doubt > concerning allophones and phonetic change rules. > Suppose there's a language allowing a syllable > structure CVF (F = fricative or liquid), where you > can compound roots not necessarily conforming to > CVF, and you have, say, > > /kak/ + /tat/ = /kaxtat/ > > (there's /x/ in the language independently from the > one related to /k/). Now, what's the /x/ in /kaxtat/, > an allophone of /k/ or merely an /x/ coming from /k/ > via a phonetic change rule? > > > --Pablo Flores >