THEORY: minor quirks (was: S. Australian (was: Re: Gz^rod|in))

At 03:40 31.3.2000 +0100, And Rosta wrote:

>I don't know -- my impression is that language is fairly tolerant of
>minor quirks. Quite a lot of people have obligatory [x] in _loch_ and
>no other words (Bach, maybe), for example.
But that's hardly a *rule*.  If they learnt that _Bach_ is /bax/ in German
they might easily enough begin to pronounce it /bA:x/ (or maybe /b^x/?

BTW some varieties of Swedish has [a:] -- opposed to [a] and [A:] -- only
in a few words of expletive or expressive character.  It is hardly a matter
of an extra phoneme; rather these words are marked as belonging to the
class of expletive/expressive words where the long open-syllable allophone
of /a/ is front rather than back -- a pragmatically/indexically conditioned
allophone, if you will accept such a thing!  Examples: if you say [gA:len]
rather than [ga:len] you are gravely declaring that someone is clinically
nuts rather than just wild or stupid, or if you say [fA:n] you are actually
talking about the Devil rather than just swearing.  I heard some Northern
England accents have a similar distinction between ['fUkIn] and ['f^kIn].



/BP

 B.Philip Jonsson  <mailto:bpj@...>bpj@netg.se
<mailto:melroch@...>melroch@my-deja.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
            Anant' avanaute quettalmar!               \ \
   __  ____ ____    _____________  ___ __   __ __     / /
   \ \/___ \\__ \  /___  _____/\ \\__ \\ \  \ \\ \   / /
   / /   / /  /  \    / /Melroch\ \_/ // /  / // /  / /
  / /___/ /_ / /\ \  / /Melarocco\_  // /__/ // /__/ /
 /_________//_/  \_\/ /Eowine__   / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
I neer Pityancalimeo\ \_____/ /ar/ /_atar Mercasso naan
~~~~~~~~~Cuinondil~~~\_______/~~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
|| Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda cuivie aiya! ||
"A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)