Re: The Language Code (take 4)
From: | Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> |
Date: | Monday, June 16, 2003, 19:19 |
DE = Dirk Elzinga
DE> Attention:
DE>
DE> This is *not* the beginning of an English Pronunciation Thread. If you
DE> insist on turning it into one, I cannot be held responsibile
Well, it's hard to discuss the quantity - er, rather, the number
of English vowels without talking about vagaries of pronunciation. :)
But I agree, let's not go off on another "in MY idiolect. . ." tangent.
DE> To get English down to 9 vowels requires a degree of ruthless parsimony
DE> that would be highly controversial.
I tend to agree, but I just came across the same figure while
rereading Pinker's _Words_and_Rules_. Pinker was discussing
one of the attempts at non-arbitrary nomenclature in which
each phoneme represents a step from the root to the branch
of a knoweldge representation tree, and said that requiring
consonant/vowel/consonant would limit every other slot to a
maximum of nine possible values. So this is apparently not
a novel idea.
Does someone have the exact list that is supposed to comprise "all
nine" of English's vowels? I can come up with a semireasonable
list by eliminating all diphthongs and identifying the schwa [@] with
short U [V], which are often the same in my idiolect:
1. bat /&/
2. bought, father /A/
3. bet /E/
4. bit /I/
5. beet /i/
6. boat /o/
7. put /U/
8. boot /u/
9. but, begin /@/
Then the vowel in "bait" would be a diphthong consisting of /E/ + /i/,
and if it's more like [e] than [E], that's just allophonic variance.
The vowel in "bite" is likewise /A/ + /i/. The vowel in "boat" is
really a diphthong because it glides to /u/ at the end, but the initial
vowel of the pair doesn't otherwise occur in English, so it still has
to take up one of the nine slots. Meanwhile, r-coloring, or even
the reduction of vowel + r to a vocalic r, heard in "heard", can be
regarded as a phonetic effect; vocalic r is, for instance, represented in
many dictionaries' pronunciation guides as schwa + r.
Thoughts on the list?
-Mark
Replies