Re: Initial /sp/ vs. /ps/ (Was: Comparison of philosophical languages)
|From:||Tim May <butsuri@...>|
|Date:||Friday, January 24, 2003, 22:06|
Tim May writes:
> James Landau writes:
> > >
> > > > I guess you're thinking of affricates when you say that.
> > >
> > > No. /ps/ isn't an affricate. /ts/ may be depending on the language.
> > The idea I originally had of an affricate (before someone on here
> > a month ago wanted to classify /kp/ or /ks/ or something as an
> > affricate, I forget who it was) was that it conficted of a dental
> > plosive followed by a sibilant. That would give us /tS/ ("ch"),
> > /dZ/ ("j"), /ts/ or /tz/, and /dz/.
> The point about an affricate is that the stop and the fricative are
> homorganic, that is, at the same position. So [kx] and [pP] are
> affricates, but [tx] and [ps] aren't.
Correction: I meant [pp\] rather than [pP], apparently.