Dirk Elzinga wrote:
> On 9/20/06, R A Brown <ray@...> wrote:
[snip
>> Thanks - it doesn't change my opinion :)
>
> I didn't think it would. But it does show that the database
> maintainers probably paid undue attention to Hayes (1995) and didn't
> do any checking of their own.
The maintainer is Dr Todd M. Bailey, a lecturer in the School of
Psychology at Cardiff University.
[snip]
>> My own feeling is that using a SPC to describe every language with word
>> stress is not going to work.
>
> I agree. I would actually want to *exclude* all systems that are
> lexical and/or morphological.
That's up to Todd Bailey - my impression is that he considered all
languages have word stress & that his notational system would suffice
for them all. His database was, he tells me, compiled as a side-effect
of his dissertation research, which he decided post_hoc might be useful
enough to make available to others on the Internet.
> It is perhaps significant that the database
>
>> does not include modern Greek.
>
> But Russian is *included*, and it is presumably a stress system which
> is lexically and morphologically determined, just as you claim for
> modern Greek.
That is certainly how I understand Russian.
> Clearly more homework needs to be done on the part of the database maintainers.
I agree. I think he must either make it clear that it is a side product
of research done some time back which he thinks might be of some use,
but that it may contain errors, or else properly overhaul the thing &
maintain as error free as possible.
[snip]
> As I said above, I would want to exclude all non-phonological stress
> systems. The remaining database, limited as it is, would still be a
> useful resource, if sufficient attention were paid to accuracy and
> fact-checking.
Quite so.
--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB}