Re: USAGE: writ [was Re: Here, *Here*, and There, *Ther

On Tuesday, July 2, 2002, at 08:15 , agricola wrote:

> Ray Brown wrote:
>
>> Yes, [w_0] is not obsolete either side of the Atlantic.  It's still
>> >common enough in Scotland, where I've even encountered [hw] and, >I
>> believe, some northern dialects.
>
> You seem to be differentiating between [w_O] and [hw], whereas Thomas
> didn't. I take it I'm right in understanding a difference between a
> voiceless W and an HW cluster (a vl. aitch with a voiced w)?
I differentiate simply because [w_0] is a single sound where as [hw] is
not, no more than, e.g. [kw] , [tw]
or [sw] are single sounds.   The /w/ in /hw/ would suffer the same
devoicing as it does in combos like /sw/ or
/tw/.

The {wh} cluster was probably adopted by the Normans (who made a mess of
previously phonetic spelling
of English) because in south-east England the sound was already [w_0] on
its way to becoming just
plain ol'  [w].

But the spelling {quh} once used in Scotland must surely imply something
like [xw] or [Xw] being used
there at one time; so I was not at all surprised when I encountered [hw].

The spelling {chw} and, indeed, pronunciation [Xw], in the Welsh loan word.
  chwipio (to whip) points
to [hw] surviving there longer than in England.

[snip]

>> Me too.  What sort of /r/ do you use?
>
> I have what I consider the "usual American R". Not a trill, not a roll,
> not a flap; it's [V] with the tongue pushed back and up, giving it that
> particular arry sound. :)
Then I admire your lingual dexterity in differentiating the initial sounds
of _write_ and _rite_.  I can manage that
only if using a trilled /r/ which is just fine in Welsh _Wrecsam_ but
would sound hopelessly affected in my
south-east English accent.    :)

Ray.

Reply