--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, R A Brown <ray@C...> wrote:
>
> 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@c...
>
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
> ==================================
> MAKE POVERTY HISTORY
>