Re: Phonological questions, bunch 2

John Vertical wrote:
[snip]
>
> An interesting example. But nasal stops are stops too, aren't they?
Depends which school of phonology you follow   ;)

Some people use 'stop' to describe any sound made by complete closure
the oral tract. This means that nasals are then classified as stops.

But others use 'stop' only to describe any sound made by complete
closure of the vocal tract; this does not include nasals, since air
passes through the nasal tract.

There are even possibly some dinosaurs still around that use 'stop' just
mean what we now commonly call plosives - but i think we may ignore them  ;)

I recall once a discussion on this as to whether flapped & trilled
consonants should be classified as stops. The general opinion IIRC was
that tho complete closure of the vocal tract may occur in the production
of these sounds, it is of such short duration that it would be somewhat
perverse to classify them as stops.

>
> Now, creation of nasal stops from nasal vowels would be more like it...
It happens, of course, when a language without nasal vowels borrows from
one that has them. Altho some Brits carefully pronounce the French nasal
vowels, most do not in borrowings. So 'envelope' is commonly /'Qnv@l@wp/
(except by people like me that fully anglicize to /'Env@l@wp/), and
'raison d'être' becomes /rEz@n'dEtr@/ (with English /r/), etc.

> even if I have never heard of nasal vowels developing from something
> else than oral vowel + nasal stop.
Nor have I.

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
MAKE POVERTY HISTORY

Replies