Re: Boreanesian /3/ (was Re: Paucity of Phonemes...

Kristian Jensen wrote:

> Thomas Wier wrote:
>
> >Kristian Jensen wrote:
> >
> >> Nik Taylor wrote:
> >>
> >> >Kristian Jensen wrote:
> >> >> where; /t[/ and /d[/ are laminal denti-alveolar, /L/ is a lateral
> >> >>        fricative, /3/ is a consonantal version of /@/ (schwa - or
> >> >>        more specifically a raised and centralized close-mid back
> >> >>        vowel).
> >> >
> >> >What?  How can /@/ be pronounced as a consonant?
> >>
> >> Easy! Consider English /r/ and then the American English retroflexed
> >> vowel in words like 'bird' and 'heard'. English /r/ could be seen as a
> >> consonantal version of the retroflexed vowel.
> >
> >That's true, but that doesn't change the fact that /@/ (as opposed to
> >[@]) can't be a consonant. /@/ in most dialects either has no allophones
> >at all, or can alternate only with another vowel, [V], but in no case that I know
> >of can it be allophonically a consonant.  Moreover, /r/, /r=/ and /@/ are
> >all separate phonemes, with only the first, a retroflex approximant, being
> >nonvocalic (approximants are technically neither vowels nor consonants).
>
> I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me, but perhaps you have
> misunderstood something.
Sorry!  I was jumping into the middle of the conversation, so it seemed
like a reasonable response.  I don't mean to tell you how you should
distribute phonemes in your language ;-)

> You snipped a couple of things from my last post as well cause I could
> have sworn I mentioned that English wasn't a very good example.
Actually, no, IIRC I was responding only to your post, which was a
response to Nik's who had clipped most of what you had said.  I apologize
for not going back to look at previous posts.

======================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704   AIM: trwier
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
======================================