Re: E and e (was: A break in the evils of English (or, Sturnan is beautiful))

At 7:32 pm +1000 2/5/02, Tristan wrote:
>On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 15:08, Raymond Brown wrote:
>
>[Talk of the primary feature.]
>
>Consider an hypothetical language. It has the following consonants:
>[x s t_D p] (and no others). None are allophones for the other; each are
>individual sounds. Nor do any have any (important) allophones. What is
>the primary distinction between [x] and [p]? POA or TOA? Should they be
>phonematicised as /x/ and /k/ or /k/ and /p/? Or as /x/ and /p/?
The phonemic theory does not IMO tell the whole story.  Hypothetical
languages can easily be constructed to make any theory fall down.  I don't
reallly understand what sound [t_D] is, it seems odd to have a voiced
off-glide from a voicless plosive.  To be honest, if I ever came across a
language with only four consonants, and those in such odd distribution, I
would suspect I didn't have the whole story and want to know more.

[snip]
>>
>> It varies over here between [bI@], [bi@], [bi:`], [bi:r] (with trilled /r/.
>
>Is there are contrast between 'beer is' and *'bee riz'?
It depends on the dialect - in some there'd be noticeable difference, but
not in all.

[snip]
>>
>> Like in Erinsborough?   :)
>
>Well, isn't Erinsborough in NSW? ;) (<--- I know it's recorded in
>Melbourne)
Is it?  All I knew is that it was filmed in Melbourne.

>To be honest, I don't know if they're using normal speech or
>not. I've only briefly watched the show (about long enough to walk into
>the loungeroom and turn the tv. off). And anyway, I'm no good at hearing
>accents on the television.
But 'Neighbours' and 'Home & Away' (never taken to the latter and not seen
Neighbours much since nine years or so back) are what we regard as example
typical Oz  :))

[snip]
>
>> similarly 'subsidence' was pronounces with
>> stress on first syllable, and the rest unstressed ["sVsIdn=s], but now
>> [s@b"saIdn=s] is not uncommon among speakers of all 'classes' - and so I
>> could go on.
>
>Is there supposed to be a /b/ in 'subsidence'?
Yes, sorry, I should've written ["sVbsIdn=s].

>.......([s@b"saIdn=s] sounds
>horribly horrible to my ears. I've only heard it ["sAbs@d@ns].)
I can't say I like it over-much, but one hears it often over here.  Nice to
know that in Oz the older form is still the norm  :)

>> ======================
>>    XRICTOC ANECTH
>> ======================
It's Greek /xris"tos a"nesti/  - it's the greeting Greeks give one another
at Eastertide.  It means "Christ is risen".  The reply is /a"nesti ali"Tos/
"He is truly risen".  The / / enclose phonemic values; the Greek I've heard
pronounce /e/ and /o/ are rather lower and closer to [E] and [O].
------------------------------------------------------

At 12:13 pm -0400 2/5/02, John Cowan wrote:
>Tristan scripsit:
[nip]
>
>> And this description of US/RP English... what does it do with 'class'
>> /clAs/ but 'gas' /g{s/ versus /cl{s/ and /g{s/? Just call it an
>> exception?
>
>U.S. English doesn't have [klA:s].
Nor much of Britain.  In most dialects the sound is the same in both words,
either /kl{s/ & /g{s/ or /klas/ & /gas/.  RP actually had /klAs/ ([a] is
not used down here in the south east) and the pronunciations /klAs/ & /g{s/
are a peculiarity of south-east England (and the so-called "RP").

Ray.

======================
   XRICTOC ANECTH
======================

Replies