orthographic syllabification [was: Re: Moraic codas]
|From:||dirk elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, July 18, 2001, 15:50|
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Adrian Morgan wrote:
> John Cowan wrote:
> > No, there really are differences: Am Can prod-uct vs. pro-duct
> > elsewhere.
> I'll side with pro-duct every time, in this case. A syllable should
> not end with an aspirated consonant. In most other cases I consider
> syllable assignment of lone consonants to be arbitrary.
?!!! I've read this numerous times now, and I still don't know
why aspirated consonants are invoked. The <d> in 'product' is
not aspirated. It only ends a syllable orthographically and not
phonologically (pace ambisyllabicity supporters), and then
apparently only in North America.
Dirk Elzinga email@example.com
"The strong craving for a simple formula
has been the undoing of linguists." - Edward Sapir