|From:||Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 1:53|
Isn't "routed" just an inflected form of "route"? Or was there a
back-formation merger somewhere?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Eugene Oh <un.doing@...> wrote:
> I have a theory that /raUt/ for <route> came about because of the
> overlapping form <routed>. Which of course can be pronounced either [ru:t@d]
> or [raUt@d] in BrE depending on the meaning.
> 2009/2/3 Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
>> Route, /rut/ vs /raUt/? Though I personally use them pretty
>> consistently with a semantic distinction, where /raUt/ is unmarked
>> while /rut/ is strictly for road names...
>> On 2/3/09, Roger Mills <romiltz@...> wrote:
>> > Mark Reed wrote:
>> >> I've learned a lot about português pronunciation.
>> >> I'm still confused
>> >> about the <ang> though. Is there a [N] anywhere, or
>> >> is it pronounced
>> >> the same as if it were spelled <ãg>?
>> > Judging from the replies, it appears to be free variation (or
>> > personal/dialectal idiosyncracy?) between [a~g] and [aNg]; probably in
>> > latter the a is still nasalized, at least somewhat......(and I suspect
>> > in the former, there might be an intrusive [N] as the velum closes for
>> > g).
>> > The only real free variation in AmEngl. I can think if is "economic(s),
>> > economical" with initial [i] or [E], often in the same discourse. Other
>> > alternants, like "either" ['iDr=] ~ ['aiDr=] or "tomato" [t@'meyto ~
>> > t@'mAto] seem to be regional, maybe even class features.
>> Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
>> Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>