Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Phonetics vs. Phonemics (was: apparently bizarre 'A's)

From:Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
Date:Friday, February 24, 2006, 13:01
[k] vs [G] doesn't seem at all odd to me.  English already has [g] as
an intervocalic allophone of /k/ in some circumstances; the step to
[G] from there is quite small.

On 2/24/06, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
> Quoting John Vertical <johnvertical@...>: > > > >As to phonetic symbology, you're right that I overstated the > > >precision. Each symbol covers a spectrum of similar sounds. But the > > >difference between phonetics and phonemics is that in the latter case > > >the sounds represented by a single symbol are identified by their > > >equivalence within a given language, and need not even be phonetically > > >similar at all. > > > > >Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> > > > > That reminds me - what's the most different allophones of a single phoneme > > you know of (either qualitively or quantitively)? > > An Argentinian I met some years ago appeared to have [h] and [C] in free > variation as the realization of /x/ before front vowels. Can anyone familiar > with Argentinian Spanish say whether that's normal down there, or just was > some > idiosyncrasy of his? > > I also seem to recall hearing of a language where /k/ had a [G] allophone > between vowels, which, while easy to imaging diachronically, is a pretty > stark > difference synchronically. > > Andreas >
-- Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>