Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: USAGE: VOT and the status of /r/

From:Your Name <conlang@...>
Date:Friday, January 28, 2005, 23:57
Tom Weir:
> Marcos wrote:
> > What's the phonemic status of trailing -r in non-rhotic > > English? Is it considered an underlying phoneme whose phonetic
realization
> > is a modification of the preceding vowel (or none at all, in the case of > > schwa), or merely a graphical convention used to indicate in writing
which
> > of two vowel phonemes should be selected? (At least in those cases > > where English spelling has some bearing on pronunciation.) > > With respect, I must disagree with Tristan. In most nonrhotic > dialects, the /r/ is really there underlyingly. One can prove > this by how it will show up as a regular English [r] in liaison > situations, as when the following word begins with a vowel. The > only catch is that a lot of nonrhotic dialects, such as some in > Britain and New England, have an epenthetic linking-r where > historically no such /r/ existed*. To my knowledge, nonrhotic > varieties of the American South do not have that linking-r.
I wasn't talking about varieties of the American South, but only my English. As I said, in my English, and TTBOMK Australian English of all registers by all native speakers (who aren't trying to sound conservatively British), the epenthetic linking-r is *always* added after *every* case of @ or long monophthongs (excluding /Ii/ and /u\:/). 'Idea is' is pronounced [AidI:r\Iz] by me and those I speak with. So I really don't see why you'd say it was underlyingly there in the only English I'm capable of commenting on :) Mark's made a more recent post which I was thinking of replying to humorously commenting on such epenthetic Rs; I was going to respond and say if I *didn't* add them, then, of course, the R is underlyingly there.
> *(This fact is not expected if one holds to a theory of phonology > such as Optimality Theory where the quality of epenthetic segments > should fall out from general markedness constraints.)
I'm not sure what any of that means :) -- Tristan (apologises for the name that appears on this message)