> Eugene Oh wrote:
> > 2007/8/6, R A Brown <ray@...>:
> >
> >>Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 5.8.2007 John Vertical wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>(Also, why would that /s/ become dental, anyway? Isn't English /t/
> >>>>alveolar?)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>True, I was thinking of cases like /p&Ts/
> >>
> >>Do you mean /pADz/ :)
> >>
> >>...and don't those who have /p&T/ for the singular, have /p&Dz/ for the
> >>plural?
> >>
> >>--
> >>Ray
> >
> >
> > To be prescriptive, shouldn't the "correct" way be the former?
>
> Nope - what prescriptivists? My dictionary gives the _voiced_
> pronunciation for the plural, i.e. /Dz/
>
> > After
> > all, there's no interposing vowel that got deleted through the ages.
>
> So what? Haven't you noticed the role *analogy* so often plays in the
> diachronic development of natlangs? If not, take a good look, for
> example, at the development of French from VL to Old French to the
> modern language.
>
> I've always said /pADz/ and that's certainly the normal pronunciation in
> this neck of the woods (SE England) - apart, that is, from the ever
> growing number who say /pAvz/ :)
>
> I wasn't, however, 100% sure about my fellow anglophones who have /p&T/
> (or /p&f/) in the singular. Hence the genuine question. It does appear
> from answers on the list that both /p&Ts/ and /p&Dz/ are heard.
>
> > 2007/8/6, Douglas Koller <laokou@...>:
> >
> >>/pADz/ reminds me of an episode of "The Avengers" (the Tara years), where
> Steed shouts, "Tap dancing!" /t&p dAnsIN/. /t&p d&nsIN/, okay, or to fulfill
> the British stereotype, /tAp dAnsIN/, but /t&p dAnsiN/ (try typing that
> three times fast)?
> >>
> >>Kou
> >>
> >
> >
> > /tAp dAnsIN/?? I'm quite sure no Brit pronounces it [tAp].
>
> Indeed not.
>
> Though our northern brethren usually pronounce /&/ as [a]; but they do
> not have /A/ in 'dance', 'path' etc. I suppose a 'Merkan hearing someone
> from the north of England say "tap dancing" with [a] might mistake it as
> /tAp dAnsIN/ - but we southerners would certainly understand it as a
> realization of /t&p d&nsIN/.
>
> > In fact,
> > /t&p dAnsiN/ is how Brits say it.
>
> Some - mainly in the south of England :)
> ------------------------------------
>
> Henrik Theiling wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > T. A. McLeay writes:
> >
> >>...
> >>(Or, by "Am I alone with this L2 pronunciation?", did you mean "are
> >>there any other L2 speakers who do this?" rather than "Or is this a
> >>marker of L2ness?".)
> >
> >
> > Since I think I modelled (and even changed) this pronunciation after
> > L1 speakers, my question was: are there any L1 speakers that do this
> > or was I misguided? You seem to indicate the latter.
>
> IMO you are indeed. A pronunciation like /pAs/ would be understood as
> "pass," pronounced variously as /pAs/ or /p&s/ and their reflexes.
> Plural after a vowel is definitely /z/.
>
> IME /Ts/ and /Dz/ maintain their individual sounds. Those L1 anglophones
> who have problems with /T/ or /D/ habitually substitute /f/ and /v/, a
> pronunciation that has increased among the younger generations here in
> England and Wales (not sure about Scotland) at a surprising rate over
> the past 50 years.
>
> --
> Ray
> ==================================
> ray@carolandray.plus.com
>
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
> ==================================
> Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
> There's none too old to learn.
> [WELSH PROVERB]
>