Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: USAGE: THEORY/USAGE: RE: [CONLANG] A discourse on Phonemics (was: Re: E and e (was: A break

From:And Rosta <a-rosta@...>
Date:Thursday, May 9, 2002, 17:30
> Tristan wrote: > > >And Rosta wrote: > > > > > As for the (immaterial, I think) question "has > Aust. phonemicized > > > length in other, non-r, environments?", try _foot:fought_ > > > >/fUt/:/fO:t/? Nothing alike! > > > Jumping in temporarily: that's what I thought, too. How about: > > rot : wrought > cot : caught ( and _court_??) > sot : sought (sort???) > not : nought/naught (north???) > et al.
I don't think they work for AusE, but they do work for e.g. some accents of the N of England. I think I may have previously posted on this list some minimal pairs differing by length alond that work for my accent: or ones similar to it: bed : bared bid : beard bud : bird foot : fought bade : bad hot : heart However, the coincidence of vowel quality in these pairs is just that, a coincidence, and there are no grounds for seeing the vowels as organized into these pairs at a phonological level. --And.


John Cowan <jcowan@...>THEORY/USAGE: RE: [CONLANG] A discourse on