Re: USAGE: Adapting non-Latin scripts

On 25/05/06, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> wrote:
> On 5/24/06, Tristan Alexander McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:
> > [Mark J. Reed wonders:
> > > Well, you can of course use whatever phonemic symbols you want, but
> > > assuming even an approximate phonetic connection, I can't imagine what
> > > phonemic distinction you are capturing via /A/ vs /A:/.
> >
> > [I assume John was referring to the vowels commonly transcribed as /V/
> > as in "come" vs /A:/ "calm". That is a perfect length distinction in
> > Australia (albeit with a low central vowel), and I could easily see
> > how a Finn learning English would use it even for American or British
> > sounds.]
>
> Ah, that does make sense  It didn't occur to be because, given the
> phonemic status of /@/ in his list, I don't see a need for a separate
> /V/ phoneme; the "stress" feature takes care of that, and it's already
> necessary for other distinctions in English...
For American English, perhaps, but "hiccup" ["hIka_"p], with /V/ in an
unstressed syllable, is a good exception to that rule for Australian
English, and I think some/most/all British English.

(But then, his list I think was American, or at least rhotic; there is
no equivalent of the vowel /3:/, unnecessary in American English, but
necessary for Australian and RP ... although then it's to distinguish
"hurry" /hVri/=[ha_"r\i] from "furry" /f3ri/=[f2:r\i], which I suppose
you could do in a somewhat abstract way with only /A/ and /@/. It'd be
funny to consider /@/ a long vowel, though.)

--
Tristan.

Replies