Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: 1. YAESR

From:Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>
Date:Wednesday, April 20, 2005, 18:20
On Wednesday, April 20, 2005, at 02:45 , Muke Tever wrote:

> Joe <joe@...> wrote: >> Tim May wrote: >>> That was what I was thinking. I don't see any better solution >>> (although you clearly know more about Welsh than me). You could cut >>> down on <ss>s a bit by writing 's and plural -s as <s> even when >>> they're phonetically [s]; e.g. <cats> rather than <catss>. It's >>> underlyingly /z/ anyway, IIRC. >> >> Or possibly underlyingly /s/. I can't imagine an [s] occuring after a >> voiced consonant. > > But there *is* [s] after voiced consonants: e.g., |fence|
..and dance, prince, France, lance etc etc. Some people do insert a non-phonemic [t] between the [n] and [s]; but very many people (including myself) do not.
> (and vowels, |loss|).
Plenty of those: ace, mice, lice, fuss, ass, voice, etc etc We also have [s[ after [l], e.g. pulse, false etc. Altho some do pronounce a [t] between [l] and [s] of _walz_, that is to do with the spelling, not ease of pronunciation; the most common pronunciation IME is /wQls/. Anyway, there is certainly a contrast of /s/ ~ /z/ in _false_ ~ _falls_
> Given that: > > 1) [s] can appear after voiced sounds (fence, loss) > 2) morpheme |s| is /z/ after voiced sounds (fens, laws) > 3) [z] can't normally appear after unvoiced sounds (heat-zone et al. > maybe) > 4) morpheme |s| is /s/ after unvoiced sounds > > strongly suggests morpheme |s| to be /z/.
There is also the fact the allomorphs are {s}, {z} and {Iz}. IMO it is easier to explain {s} as a devoiced variant of {z} after non-sibilant voiceless obstruents, and {Iz} as a conditioned variant with epenthetic vowel after sibilants. In fact, as the three {z} morphemes (plural*, 3rd, & the possessive clitic) behave exactly the same way as the reduced forms of _is_ and _has_ (written as 's), a good case can be made that the morph is {Iz} :) *Yes, I do know the plural morpheme has other allomorphs as well :) But to be fair to Jo, I think his cymricized YAESR was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek and that he was, as we say, 'thinking on his feet' when he made the remark about /s/. This question is of importance only if: (a) we are making a serious analysis of English morphology; and/or (b) we a seriously designing YAESR on a morphophonemic basis, rather than a phonemic or phonetic basis. Neither of these seem particularly on topic to me. Ray =============================================== =============================================== Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight, which is not so much a twilight of the gods as of the reason." [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]