> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ed Heil
> Sent: Saturday, February 5, 2000 12:51 AM
> To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> Subject: Re: THEORY: h huffnpuffery (was: RE: varia)
> My copy of J.C. Catford is more enlightening. Catford would only
> consider
> high vowels to be equivalent to approximants, not all vowels. He
> mentions
> that [h] *can* be analyzed as a voiceless semivowel of the same
> quality as
> the vowel that follows it; under this analysis, [h] followed by a
> high
> vowel could conceiveably be considered an approximant.
Interesting... I wonder if there's any connection between that and the
Japanese allophones of /h/ before front vowels: /ha hi hu he ho/ [ha Ci p\u
he ho]. Only when the phoneme comes before a high vowel does it become
anything other than [h].
Eric Christopherson / *Aiworegs Ghristobhorosyo suHnus
raccoon@elknet.net