Re: Futurese

On 2 May 02, at 0:50, Christophe Grandsire wrote:

> En réponse à Javier BF <uaxuctum@...>:
>
> > >[s]
> > >[S]
> >
> > The same, just one consonant /s/, [S] is the
> > allophone used when vowel /i/ follows.
>
> You then forget the hundreds of Japanese words using syllables like [Sa], [So]
> and [Su], contrasting with [sa], [so] and [su].
I don't think he's forgetting them, but rather considering them as
forms with -y- in the middle. Which would make phonetic [Sa] a phonemic
/sja/ with a normal /s/ (which simply gets realised as [S] in this
environment, before /j/).

It's a bit like claiming that English "cake" and "quake" are pronounced
differently, so "qu" must be a different phoneme from "c" -- I would
consider those words to be /kEIk/ and /kwEIk/, respectively, so the
true difference is an inserted /w/ rather than a separate consonant.
OK, the analogy is not perfect, but I hope you understand the point I
was trying to make. (And I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Javier
here, only that I think I understand his point.)

> > >[ts]/[dz]
> > >[tS]/[dZ]
> >
> > [ts] and [tS] are allophones of /t/, used respectively
> > when vowel /u/ and vowel /i/ follows.
>
> You forget then all the words using syllables like [tSa], [tSo] and [tSu], like
> the very common and important word [tSa]: tea.
Again, he probably considers [tSa] to correspond to phonemic /tja/,
which is, of course, pronounced differently from /ta/ because it has
/j/ in the middle, which causes [t] to go to its allophone [tS]. It's
not /t/+/a/ vs /tS/+/a/ but /t/+/a/ vs /t/+/j/+/a/.

> > [dz] and [dZ] are allophones of /d/, used respectively
> > when vowel /u/ and vowel /i/ follows.
>
> Idem, there are nowadays plenty of words with [dZa], [dZo] and
> [dZu], and [dz] is now common with every vowel.
Again, this is due to /j/ (since [dZ] is phonemically /z/ before /i/ or
/j/).

> > I would consider the combinations with [w] and [j]
> > as diphthongs much rather than considering [w] and
> > [j] as consonants.
>
> But that doesn't fit the language. If they are diphtongues, why can't they be
> used with consonants, since a diphtongue counts as one vowel?
They are. /ja/ is used with /k/, for example, for form /kja/ [kja], and
with /z/ to form /zja/ [dZa]. [w], on the other hand, is no longer used
with consonants, though I believe it may have been in the past -- at
any rate, old kana orthography had /kwa/ and /gwa/ segments (which
became modern /ka/ and /ga/).

>  But even if you consider them as
> > consonants, the total amount of Japanese consonants
> > would remain at 13, way far from 27. Well, and if
> > you also consider the glottal stop as a separate
> > consonant, then the total would be 14.
>
> No, since your analysis is flawed. The consonants you presented are
> not the only phonemic consonants of Japanese (or else you'll have to
> explain me how the Japanese contrast words like |da|: to be and |ja|:
> good bye, or between |ta|: field and |cha|: tea).
Simple: they're /da/ and /zja/, and /ta/ and /tja/, respectively, with
the /j/ causing a phonetic (but not phonemic) change in the preceding
consonant.

Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@...>