------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
From: R A Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Alex Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Jean-François Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: John Quijada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Tristan McLeay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: Haiku Translation - Piercing Chill
From: Nik Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: [OT] Finnish English
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 15:15:36 +0000
From: R A Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
Thomas Hart Chappell wrote:
> According to some dictionaries, the difference between
> synizesis and syn(a)eresis is, that synizesis does not form a diphthong,
> but synaeresis or syneresis does.
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/61/88/S0968800.html
> http://www.bartleby.com/61/73/S0967300.html
>
> Neither of them has to do with spelling.
Just two points:
1. I explicitly said that I was using the terms as they were used by the
Greeks (they after all invented the terms); in the ancient usage, *it
was a difference of spelling*.
2. Dictionaries, at least on this list, are not prescriptive; they are,
or should be, descriptive. They are not, however, infallible even as
descriptive documents.
>
> They seem to be poetic terms, having to do with variant pronunciation;
> pronouncing "seest" as [sist] instead of [sijest] would be synizesis;
NO! [sist] has only _one_ vowel. It is crasis. It does not even conform
to the www.bartleby.com definition of 'synizesis - and certainly not
common modern use of the term. The definition www.bartleby.com gives is:
"The union in pronunciation of two adjacent vowels into one syllable
without forming a diphthong."
NOTE: it says, into one _syllable_, *not* one vowel. If it meant one
vowel, it would surely have said so.
No body, as far as I know, has suggested that either syn(a)eresis or
synizesis is anything other than the pronunciation of two vowels in a
single syllable. My problem is that I do not see how this can happen
phonologically except by the formation of some sort of diphthong (even
if in the phonology of a particular language it is analyzed as a glide
or approximant + vowel).
> pronouncing the "-dience" of "disobedience" as [djens] instead of [dijens]
> would be syneresis.
Not according to ancient usage, nor AFAIK according to modern usage.
> They are kinds of metaplasm, as are crasis and elision.
Eh??? Once upon a time metaplasm referred to the formation of cases of
nouns which lacked a nominative case, or to the formation of tenses and
other verb forms of verbs which lacked a present tense. When did it get
this new meaning? And why?
>
> One dictionary has syneresis operating between the final vowel of a word
> that ends in a vowel and the initial vowel of the next word which begins in
> a vowel; it uses a different term, synaloepha, for the same kind of
> phenomenon occurring word-internally.
Does it, indeed? And there were those ignorant ancients thinking
synaeresis could occur with words as well as across word boundaries.
Darn, I'd better build a time machine quickly and go and enlighten them.
> But
> http://www.willamette.edu/~blong/Words/MetaplasmIII.html
> has syneresis and synizesis both as subtypes of synaloepha.
So they are. But I am, shall we say, less than impressed by
www.willamette.edu/~blong/Words/MetaplasmIII.html.
When two vowels come together, they can either remain disyllabic (what
the ancients called 'hiatus') or 'blend' into a single (synaloepha,
i.e. ancient (Attic) Greek /synalojp_hE:/). I give below the table set
out by Sidney Allen on page 92 of "Vox Graeca" - except that I have
replaced the parenthesized Greek words by their conventional Latinized
spellings that we use in English. (You will need a monospace font to
read it properly!)
Disyllabic ------------------------------------------- hiatus
|Contraction
|(crasis)
|(a) marked ---|
| |Combination
| |(synaeresis)
|(i) coalescence ---|
| |(b) unmarked -- (synizesis)
Monosyllabic -----|
(synaloepha) | |Elision
|(ii) Loss ------------------------|
| (thlipsis) |Prodelision
| (aphaeresis)
Admittedly, some of the terms are not exactly the same as I would used.
but from what he goes on to say it is clear that he means what i have
been saying. And I think that anyone who has read my mails and is of
goodwill (and this supposed to be the season of goodwill, is it not?)
will follow.
> ---
>
> Question;
>
> When two words occur together, the first ending in a vowel and the second
> beginning in a vowel, and the pronunciation of the vowels influences each
> other, isn't that called "sandhi"?
Yes, but the two sounds are not necessarily vowels. Consonants may also
be involved in _sandhi_. Sandhi is term used in syntax and morphology,
and Charlie seem to want to know the phonological definition.
> For that matter, why did no-one bring up "mutation"?
Because its use would be misleading, I guess. As far as I know it has
two uses in linguistics:
1. In historic or _diachronic_ linguistics to refer to the influence of
a sound's quality owing to the influence of sounds in adjacent morphemes
and words.
2. Probably the one more commonly used on this list, in _synchronic_
contexts to refer to consonant changed in the modern Insular Celtic
languages which, tho once phonologically conditioned, are now purely
grammatical.
Neither, as I understand it, would be appropriate for the Senjecan
feature described by Charlie.
> Perhaps neither word would have been adequate. But would neither word have
> been appropriate at all? It seems to me they both would apply, even if not
> well enough.
Sandhi applies, but is too unspecific IMHO for the particular feature
Charlie was asking about. Mutation IMO would not have applied, for the
reasons I give above.
--
Ray
==================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
MAKE POVERTY HISTORY
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 10:36:07 -0500
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
On 12/11/05, John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
>
> My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/ or
> /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), but are there any native dialects
> left that would still separate those two?
I don't know of any dialects which have different vowels there, but
there are many which make a distinction. The dominant one in my
region, for instance, drops the [j] in words like |new| and pronounces
it as simply [nu] instead of [nju], while preserving the [j] in
|cute|. At least in the northeastern US in the mid-20th century, and
probably elsewhere and elsewhen, the disappearance of [j] from such
words has been a shibboleth used to distinguish the uneducated
([nu]-sayers) from the edjucated ([nju]-sayers), which would imply
that the [j] version is the conservative one.
> But what
> about the /ju:/ in words like "lute"? They can't surely ALL be later
> borrowings, re-spelt pGVS /o:/ or /eu/, or exceptions to the GVS.
I don't know the answer, but I should point out that there was
substantial overlap between the GVS and the standardization of English
spelling. It's not that words were re-examined and re-spelled after
the shift; it's just that they were standardized at different points
during the shift.
> explanation that makes some sense to me is that they used to be just /u/,
> but lenghtened to /u:/ for whatever reason; but this doesn't explain where
> the /j/ came from?? *confuzzled*
>
> John Vertical
>
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:32:19 -0500
From: Alex Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 10:36:07 -0500, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 12/11/05, John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
>>
>> My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/ or
>> /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), but are there any native dialects
>> left that would still separate those two?
>
>I don't know of any dialects which have different vowels there, but
>there are many which make a distinction. The dominant one in my
>region, for instance, drops the [j] in words like |new| and pronounces
>it as simply [nu] instead of [nju], while preserving the [j] in
>|cute|. At least in the northeastern US in the mid-20th century, and
>probably elsewhere and elsewhen, the disappearance of [j] from such
>words has been a shibboleth used to distinguish the uneducated
>([nu]-sayers) from the edjucated ([nju]-sayers), which would imply
>that the [j] version is the conservative one.
This isn't a distinction between old /ew/ and 'long u' in any dialect I know
of. It's just loss of the [j] after coronals, and it applies to both
spellings of [ju(:)]:
|cute| [kjut], |lute| [lut]
|pew| [pju], |new| [nu]
>> But what
>> about the /ju:/ in words like "lute"? They can't surely ALL be later
>> borrowings, re-spelt pGVS /o:/ or /eu/, or exceptions to the GVS.
>
>I don't know the answer, but I should point out that there was
>substantial overlap between the GVS and the standardization of English
>spelling. It's not that words were re-examined and re-spelled after
>the shift; it's just that they were standardized at different points
>during the shift.
I seem to recall that even this [ju(:)] (exceptions aside) is indeed derived
from ME /eu/ or /iu/, and the spelling |u| is motivated by French |u| = [y].
Alex
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:51:11 +0100
From: Jean-François Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vertical" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
> Tristan McLeay wrote:
>
>>So perhaps a more complete more summary summary:
>
> Thanks aplenty - very informative!
> However, this reminded me of another issue... (In case the continued
> existence of this thread annoys someone, I can always take it off-list.)
>
>>/j/:
>>In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
>
> My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/ or
> /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), [...]
What? Are there really dialects of English with a high front rounded vowel?
Where? And which words are concerned?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:24:39 -0500
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
On 12/11/05, Alex Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This isn't a distinction between old /ew/ and 'long u' in any dialect I know
> of. It's just loss of the [j] after coronals, and it applies to both
> spellings of [ju(:)]:
>
> |cute| [kjut], |lute| [lut]
> |pew| [pju], |new| [nu]
Duh. Should have examined more examples. Thanks for the
clarification; I clearly just hadn't thought about it much.
> I seem to recall that even this [ju(:)] (exceptions aside) is indeed derived
> from ME /eu/ or /iu/, and the spelling |u| is motivated by French |u| = [y].
Similar to John's ideolect, then:
> My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/ or
> /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), [...]
To which Jean-François replied:
> What? Are there really dialects of English with a high front rounded vowel?
> Where? And which
> words are concerned?
AFAIK [y] does not occur in any native English dialects, but it does
appear in non-native ideolects. IME it usually shows up in place of
[ju] among some speakers who have [y] in their native lang. I guess
it's a sort of vocalic palatalization effect?
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:28:28 +0200
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
Jean-François Colson wrote:
> > >In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
> > > My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is
> > /ju:/ or /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), [...]
>
>What? Are there really dialects of English with a high front rounded
>vowel? Where? And which words are concerned?
Sorry - I meant "accent". That word somehow completely escaped my mind when
writing the previous message - hence the contrived expression "non-native
dialect". :D Oh, and I'm located in Finland.
Anyway, practically everyone here pronounces "New York" as /ny: jo:k/ or
some variation thereof. The fronting applies widely to word-final /ju:/, and
some people (like me) extend this to various other environments - at its
worst, to all non-initial positions. The /y:/ in question tends to be a [y:]
proper only in the speech of people with little to none English fluency. Eg.
I pronounce "few new clues" as something like [fHu\ n_jHu\ k_hlHu\s] and
definitely not [fy: ny: kly:s]
I could dig deeper into the stereotypical Finnish pronounciation of English,
but I guess you may have lost your interest already.
John Vertical
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:07:53 -0800
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
I'm looking for a way to convey proper pronunciation
of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
different native languages. It's all well and good to
describe "A" as sounding like the "A" in "father", but
for a non-English speaker, that doesn't help.
What I'd like is a table with columns across the top
for various languages so that "A" might be described
in the "English" column as "fAther", and in the
"Deutsch" column as "vAter", and in the Espanol column
as "pAdre", and so on.
The sounds I need are shown in this table:
http://fiziwig.com/bp0.html
What I need is exemplar words for several other
languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
German, but what other languages would be good to have
in such a table?
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:28:21 -0500
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:07:53 -0500, Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I'd like is a table with columns across the top
> for various languages so that "A" might be described
> in the "English" column as "fAther", and in the
> "Deutsch" column as "vAter", and in the Espanol column
> as "pAdre", and so on.
This is a good idea. You're headed for trouble if you don't specify which
dialect(s) of English. "A" in "father" is usually /A/ but it can be /V/,
/a/ or even /E/, plus or minus /:/. OTOH, having a set of comparison
languages would help disambiguate a lot.
> The sounds I need are shown in this table:
> http://fiziwig.com/bp0.html
>
> What I need is exemplar words for several other
> languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
> German, but what other languages would be good to have
> in such a table?
I don't know much about the phonological uniqueness of the languages, but
to reach the maximum number of L1 and L2 speakers, assuming those speakers
have English as L1 or L2 (so they can read the rest of the page), you'd
want something like English (GA), English (RP), Spanish, French, German,
Russian and Hindi.
There is a selection of charts in Daniels & Bright that might help. I'm
feeling kind of inspired right now, so I might start compiling a page of
my own.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:34:53 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Here's the list for French at least.
_a_ller
_e/_trange (e with acute accent)
_F_rance
_i^_le (i with circumflex accent)
_k_ilo
_l_es
_m_arche/
_n_itroge\ne
Morc_eau_
_p_orc
Lingui_s_tique
_t_e^te
_u_sine
Ea_u_ for W (there isn't a direct equivalent of this letter in French.)
E/_ch_arpe for X
Enc_y_clope/die (not exact, but used as a vowel here.)
On 12/11/05, Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to convey proper pronunciation
> of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
> different native languages. It's all well and good to
> describe "A" as sounding like the "A" in "father", but
> for a non-English speaker, that doesn't help.
>
> What I'd like is a table with columns across the top
> for various languages so that "A" might be described
> in the "English" column as "fAther", and in the
> "Deutsch" column as "vAter", and in the Espanol column
> as "pAdre", and so on.
>
> The sounds I need are shown in this table:
> http://fiziwig.com/bp0.html
>
> What I need is exemplar words for several other
> languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
> German, but what other languages would be good to have
> in such a table?
>
> --gary
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:53:12 -0500
From: John Quijada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Here's the list for French at least.
[snip]
>Ea_u_ for W (there isn't a direct equivalent of this letter in French.)
------------------------------------------
Better to use something like _ou_i, don't you think?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:03:00 -0800
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
--- Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:07:53 -0500, Gary Shannon
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> This is a good idea. You're headed for trouble if
> you don't specify which
> dialect(s) of English. "A" in "father" is usually
> /A/ but it can be /V/,
> /a/ or even /E/, plus or minus /:/. OTOH, having a
> set of comparison
> languages would help disambiguate a lot.
There are limited letters in the elomi alphabet so
precise pronunciation is not so critical. "V" can pass
for "F", "B" can pass for "P" and so on. So in most
cases close is good enough.
<snip>
>
> I don't know much about the phonological uniqueness
> of the languages, but
> to reach the maximum number of L1 and L2 speakers,
> assuming those speakers
> have English as L1 or L2 (so they can read the rest
> of the page),
I should have metnioned, the page this chart will be
used on will have no English on it, only Elomi. It
will be strictly a learn-by-pictures page (sample at
http://fiziwig.com/pix/imupix01.html )
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:36:49 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
[quote]Better to use something like _ou_i, don't you think?[/quote]
There you go...I guess that works.
On 12/11/05, Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:07:53 -0500, Gary Shannon
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > This is a good idea. You're headed for trouble if
> > you don't specify which
> > dialect(s) of English. "A" in "father" is usually
> > /A/ but it can be /V/,
> > /a/ or even /E/, plus or minus /:/. OTOH, having a
> > set of comparison
> > languages would help disambiguate a lot.
>
> There are limited letters in the elomi alphabet so
> precise pronunciation is not so critical. "V" can pass
> for "F", "B" can pass for "P" and so on. So in most
> cases close is good enough.
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I don't know much about the phonological uniqueness
> > of the languages, but
> > to reach the maximum number of L1 and L2 speakers,
> > assuming those speakers
> > have English as L1 or L2 (so they can read the rest
> > of the page),
>
> I should have metnioned, the page this chart will be
> used on will have no English on it, only Elomi. It
> will be strictly a learn-by-pictures page (sample at
> http://fiziwig.com/pix/imupix01.html )
>
> --gary
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:05:11 +0900
From: Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Gary Shannon wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to convey proper pronunciation
> of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
> different native languages. It's all well and good to
> describe "A" as sounding like the "A" in "father", but
> for a non-English speaker, that doesn't help.
>
> What I'd like is a table with columns across the top
> for various languages so that "A" might be described
> in the "English" column as "fAther", and in the
> "Deutsch" column as "vAter", and in the Espanol column
> as "pAdre", and so on.
>
> The sounds I need are shown in this table:
> http://fiziwig.com/bp0.html
>
> What I need is exemplar words for several other
> languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
> German, but what other languages would be good to have
> in such a table?
http://alt-usage-english.org/ipa/ascii_ipa_combined.shtml covers US and
UK English, plus a few words in other languages.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:22:05 +1100
From: Tristan McLeay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 17:51 +0100, Jean-François Colson wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vertical" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 2:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
>
>
> > Tristan McLeay wrote:
> >
> >>So perhaps a more complete more summary summary:
> >
> > Thanks aplenty - very informative!
> > However, this reminded me of another issue... (In case the continued
> > existence of this thread annoys someone, I can always take it off-list.)
> >
> >>/j/:
> >>In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
> >
> > My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/
> > or
> > /u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), [...]
>
> What? Are there really dialects of English with a high front rounded
> vowel? Where? And which words are concerned?
I think Scottish has /y/, doesn't, in place of RP /u:/ and/or /U/ in
some words. I don't know exactly how far front it is.
The Australian & New Zealand English vowel /u\:/ (u-dashed, equiv. of
RP /u:/) is nowadays about as far front as the AusE /&/ which puts it
front-of-centre and apparently further forward than the vowel denoted
as /y(:)/ in some other languages. It doesn't contrast with a back /u:/,
although it has an allophone [U:] which is very obvious to native
speakers, even though it's fully automatic (primarily before /l/). It's
the same as Swedish /u\:/ to my ear, and very similar to /y(:)/ in many
other languages that have it ... though not to the Swedish /y(:)/ which
sounds more similar to AusE /I/ or /i:/ or /I@/ and doubt if you can say
it while smiling! AusE long o also apparently has an allophone described
as [a_"y], but in those descriptions the environment is lacking...
I think the American English vowel /u/ (again, equiv. of RP /u:/) can
get pretty far front in some dialects, particularly after coronals.
There's also dialects with what could be described as a mid front
rounded vowel. Mostly I think these are instances of /3:/. AusE and
NZE /3:/ tends to be mid-close and relatively front and rounded, which
happened earlier and is carried further in NZE, hence [2:] is not a bad
description of the NZE vowel and is used by various authors. I think the
same similar things happen in various English dialects, with various
levels of openness. I think some dialects might get close with their
realisations of "long o", but that might be my ear hearing one thing for
something different...
--
Tristan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:27:28 +0100
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Hi!
Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:07:53 -0500, Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What I'd like is a table with columns across the top
> > for various languages so that "A" might be described
> > in the "English" column as "fAther", and in the
> > "Deutsch" column as "vAter", and in the Espanol column
> > as "pAdre", and so on.
>
> This is a good idea. You're headed for trouble if you don't specify
> which dialect(s) of English. "A" in "father" is usually /A/ but it
> can be /V/, /a/ or even /E/, plus or minus /:/. OTOH, having a set of
> comparison languages would help disambiguate a lot.
Same for German: [A] is not used is many dialects. It is tradition to
write [A:] vs. [a], but most dialects I a aware of have a centralised
[a_"] (+- length) for both. Anyway, there's [A:] vs. [a] in northern
dialect, and probably others. So it'd not be clear what you mean from
the German entry alone, either.
**Henrik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 19:52:43 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
John Vertical wrote:
>
> Sorry - I meant "accent". That word somehow completely escaped my mind
> when
> writing the previous message - hence the contrived expression "non-native
> dialect". :D Oh, and I'm located in Finland.
>
> Anyway, practically everyone here pronounces "New York" as /ny: jo:k/ or
> some variation thereof. The fronting applies widely to word-final /ju:/,
> and
> some people (like me) extend this to various other environments - at its
> worst, to all non-initial positions. The /y:/ in question tends to be a
> [y:]
> proper only in the speech of people with little to none English fluency.
> Eg.
> I pronounce "few new clues" as something like [fHu\ n_jHu\ k_hlHu\s] and
> definitely not [fy: ny: kly:s]
To me is sounds as if you've simply adopted the local pronunciation of that
particular name, New York, which in turn is probably based on Swedish _ny_
or maybe just some local deformation....... But lots of Americans would say
[ni'jor\k] in casual speech, and of course the parody of NY accent is
"N'yawk". Would you pronounce [ny:] in a less-known name, say, New
Brunswick, New Haven, Newton Upper Falls :-)))??
>
> I could dig deeper into the stereotypical Finnish pronounciation of
> English,
> but I guess you may have lost your interest already.
Not at all. I'm sure there's a "Finnish-English" accent, just as there are
XXX-English accents in every country where Engl. is an acquired language--
and for many, not as carefully studied (or taught), perhaps, as one might
wish.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 19:10:13 -0600
From: Nik Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Haiku Translation - Piercing Chill
Paul Bennett wrote:
> I have the same problem with Thagojian: most of the morphology is
> suffixes, so rhyming is not a very high form of art. I've settled on
> alliteration and syllable repetition, placed within a limited number of
> metrical shapes -- this seems to have been the way things were done in
> the oldest Germanic, Vedic and Greek poetry, and thus is a likely
> candidate for the PIE model.
Unfortunately, Uatakassi uses both prefixes and suffixes rather
extensively, so that alliteration and rhyme are both trivial. I suspect
syllable-count would be more important.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:21:45 -0800
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
--- Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
<snip>
>
> Same for German: [A] is not used is many dialects.
> It is tradition to
> write [A:] vs. [a], but most dialects I a aware of
> have a centralised
> [a_"] (+- length) for both. Anyway, there's [A:]
> vs. [a] in northern
> dialect, and probably others. So it'd not be clear
> what you mean from
> the German entry alone, either.
>
> **Henrik
Because Elomi is designed to be very forgiving (for
example, 'e' can be anything from fairly close to the
English "bit" through "bet" to "bait", and then some)
all that is required is that the vowel examples be
somewhere within the acceptable range of sounds for
that vowel.
The whole idea behind the Elomi vowel system is to NOT
pick nits over subtle differences in sounds. A German
umlaut-U is close enough to the Elomi 'U' to serve, as
is the non-umlaut U. It is sooooo very not fussy.
The consonants are a little odd because 'x' is
pronounced like "sh", 'c' like "ch", and a few other
differences for which multi-lingual examples need to
be provided.
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:37:25 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Gary Shannon wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to convey proper pronunciation
> of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
> different native languages. It's all well and good to
> describe "A" as sounding like the "A" in "father", but
> for a non-English speaker, that doesn't help.
You should probably include the IPA-- that settles all arguments.
Re your voiceless stops: you need to specify whether they're aspirated (like
Engl. and IIRC German) or not (like Span. and French and IIRC Dutch); or
whether it doesn't matter....
Aargh, as others have commented, even the "a as in father" isn't the same in
every dialect. And I'm not sure the /a/ of French ([a]] frontish) is quite
the same as Spanish or Italian /a/ back-ish [A] (as in my "father", to my
ear). But learners wouldn't go wrong using any of those. The old dodge used
to be "The vowels have their European values".
You are going to have trouble finding good equivalents for "w, y, r"--
w: French usually ou before a vowel
Spanish initial huV- "hueso, huevo, (Peruvian huaca)", medial -uV- as is
"cuando, puesto, cuidado"...
I don't know what German does; it's not a native sound.
y: French y- as is yeux; German j
Spanish: careful here-- I think initial hiV- and medial -iV- would be best,
"hierba, piensa, cambiar" since orthographic "y" is often more of a
fricative than in Engl., and > [Z] in some dials.
r: AFAICT, Standard American is the only equivalent, amongst well known
languages of the world. Even Brit. r is sometimes a tap, depending on dial.
Maybe you could allow a tap as a permissible variant, then you could include
RP "very" and Spanish "pero, para"
Most of your sounds are found in Malay/Indonesian (except "r"), but I'm not
sure you'd need to go that far afield...?
(snip a bit)
> What I need is exemplar words for several other
> languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
> German, but what other languages would be good to have
> in such a table?
If you really want to internationalize it, you ought perhaps to include
Russian and Japanese at minimum; probably Chinese too but I can't help you
with those-- and again you have the dial/lang. problem
When I have a bit more time, I'll try to come up with suitable Span. (and
Indo. if you want them) words.
BTW, I thumbed through a few of your lessons-- very well done, and the
illustrations, the pointing hand etc. are delightful.
(ObConlang: I fudged the whole issue by stating that the sounds of Kash
simply "are very close to Spanish" and letting it go at that, with minor
comments on the few differences..........I'm now thinking I ought to make
that section a bit more precise...)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:28:20 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Gary Shannon wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to convey proper pronunciation
> of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
> different native languages. (snip)
> What I need is exemplar words for several other
> languages. At the very least Spanish, French, and
> German, but what other languages would be good to have
> in such a table?
>
Here are some representative Spanish words:
a padre, más; e mesa; f foto; i si, misa; k= c in casa, copa, qu- in qiero,
queso; l los, calor; m más, mamá; n no, anís; o los, otro; p pan, pensar; s
santo, seis; t tengo, tú; u tú, mucho; w = hu- in huevo, -uV- in pues,
cuento; x [S] no equiv.; y hi- in hierba, -iV- in pienso, cambiar
ptk are unaspirated; tdn are dental-- does that matter?
Diphthongs: ay hay, amáis; aw =au causa, laudar
b bien, ambos (but not intervocalic!); c [tS] chato, leche; d dos, donde
(not intervoc!); g gastar, guitarra; h (no friction!!: Mex. and dial.)
mé_x_ico, _j_ota; j [Z] Argentine* y and ll: yo, llamo, calle; q [N] n+g
tango (some dials., any final nasal = N, probably considered sub-standard);
r [american] no equiv.; v no equiv; z no equiv., but sometimes in s+vd.C as,
desde, mismo
*Maybe Andalusian dial. too, but I don't rightly remember if it's as
noticeable as in Argentine...
Educated Spanish speakers often know French; so Fr. equivalents of x [S], j
[Z], v and z are familiar.
Indonesian:
a apa; e [e] in beda, [E] in pesta; f fajar, daftar (Arab.); i gila; k kaki,
kami; l lima; m mana, enam; n nusa, tanah; o tolong, kopi; p panjang; s
suka, besok; t tarik, mata; u nusa, dua; w wakil, nyawa (but it's
labiodental!!); x [S]=sy syukur (Arab.); y yatim, kaya; ay =ai in sampai;
casual speech tahi 'shit'* is close; aw =au in lampau, kalau; casual tahu
'know' is close.
ptk are unasp; t is dental, d,n are alveolar. The Arab. words given are
quite common, and usu. pronounced correctly; but "f" as [p] is also
common...... *tahi is not as impolite in Indo as in Engl.
b besar, lebih; c [tS] cuka, macam; d dua, padang; g gila; h harap, bohong;
j [Z] no equiv.; q [N] =ng in ngomong; r [r\] no equiv.; v no good equiv.,
usually pronounced [f]; z rare--Arab. zakat 'alms' and lezat 'delicious',
scholarly zaman 'era, epoch' are somewhat familiar, however
Hope this is of use.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:38:48 +0900
From: Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Gary Shannon wrote:
> --- Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://alt-usage-english.org/ipa/ascii_ipa_combined.shtml
>
>>covers US and
>>UK English, plus a few words in other languages.
>
>
> Interesting, but waaaaaay too detailed. There are
> loads of different vowel sounds in the table, any one
> of which would be acceptable for a given Elomi vowel.
> Elomi has only five vowel sounds, and as long as the
> speaker is tolerably close that's fine. All I really
> want out of the table I'm trying to build is to get
> the speaker of any L1 TOLERABLY CLOSE to the 16
> primary vowel and consonant sounds in the first part
> of the table.
>
> Anything more precise than tolerably close is way
> overkill for this application. See
> http://fiziwig.com/pix/imupix01.html
True, but you have to bear in mind that any real attempet at describing
teh vowels of a real language is going to be focused on the sounds of
that language, and would have to include all teh sounds of that language
to be taken seriously. English has between 20-30 vowel sounds, depending
on dialect. Your best bet is to use that list as a guide, pick the
sounds you want, drop the rest, and make your own list.
For example, in Demuan, the letter "A" has /V/ as the core vowel, but
/Q/ and /@/ are acceptable pronunciation.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 22:33:01 -0800
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
--- Fabian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary Shannon wrote:
> > I'm looking for a way to convey proper
> pronunciation
> > of conlang letters to non-linguists who may have
> > different native languages.
<snip>
>
http://alt-usage-english.org/ipa/ascii_ipa_combined.shtml
> covers US and
> UK English, plus a few words in other languages.
Interesting, but waaaaaay too detailed. There are
loads of different vowel sounds in the table, any one
of which would be acceptable for a given Elomi vowel.
Elomi has only five vowel sounds, and as long as the
speaker is tolerably close that's fine. All I really
want out of the table I'm trying to build is to get
the speaker of any L1 TOLERABLY CLOSE to the 16
primary vowel and consonant sounds in the first part
of the table.
Anything more precise than tolerably close is way
overkill for this application. See
http://fiziwig.com/pix/imupix01.html
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:39:29 -0000
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
--- In [email protected], caeruleancentaur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There is a phonetic phenomenon in Senjecan that occurs when the
>personal pronoun nominative + the present tense marker are prefixed
>to a verbnoun with an initial vowel.
>m-i-ât-a /mi'at_da/
>1sg.-pres.-go-indic.
>I go.
>This becomes mïâta. m_j'at_da
Something similar, if not identical, happens in Swahili. In the
KITU class of nouns, ki- is prefixed to the root for the singular
and vi- for the plural, e.g., kikapu, basket; vikapu, baskets.
However, sometimes before a vowel these prefixes are altered to "ch"
and "vy" respectively. Thus ki-umba, room, becomes chumba, and vi-
umba, rooms, becomes vyumba. My text doesn't give a name for this
phenomenon. I would imagine that the spelling "vyumba" indicates a
palatal consonant.
I do not know why this doesn't occur in all such situations. E.g.
kiatu, shoe, and viatu, shoes!
Charlie
http://wiki.frath.net/user:caeruleancentaur
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:41:49 +0200
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Finnish English
Roger Mills wrote:
>
>John Vertical wrote:
> > Anyway, practically everyone here pronounces "New York" as
> > /ny: jo:k/ or some variation thereof. The fronting applies widely
> > to word-final /ju:/, and some people (like me) extend this to
> > various other environments - at its worst, to all non-initial
> > positions. The /y:/ in question tends to be a [y:] proper only in
> > the speech of people with little to none English fluency.
> > Eg. I pronounce "few new clues" as something like [fHu\ n_jHu\
> > k_hlHu\s] and definitely not [fy: ny: kly:s]
>
>To me is sounds as if you've simply adopted the local pronunciation
>of that particular name, New York, which in turn is probably based
>on Swedish _ny_ or maybe just some local deformation.......
>Would you pronounce [ny:] in a less-known name, say, New Brunswick, New
>Haven, Newton Upper Falls :-)))??
Um, as explained, I would not pronounce *[y:]* in ANY English word (except
maybe for parody reasons)... but what I call /y:/ I do use in all instances
of "new". You're probably right about the Swedish influence, but this also
applies to words where there is no instantly obvious Swedish cognate - say,
"few".
> > I could dig deeper into the stereotypical Finnish pronounciation of >
>English, but I guess you may have lost your interest already.
>
>Not at all. I'm sure there's a "Finnish-English" accent, just as there are
>XXX-English accents in every country where Engl. is an acquired language--
>and for many, not as carefully studied (or taught), perhaps, as one might
>wish.
Certainly there is. But mostly it's just mapping English phonemes to Finnish
ones, mixed with a number of spelling pronounciations and L1 analogies.
You are right, however, that it's not really studied or taught as well as it
could. During the 10 years of English I read in school, I don't recall *any*
teacher or textbook explicitely mentioning that there are differences
between eg. English /U/ and Finnish /u/. (Of course we had audio material to
listen to for correct pronounciation, but said distinction and several
others are lost to Finnish ears.)
John Vertical
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:03:08 +0100
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pronunciation guides for non-linguists
Hi!
Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>...
> The whole idea behind the Elomi vowel system is to NOT
> pick nits over subtle differences in sounds. A German
> umlaut-U is close enough to the Elomi 'U' to serve, as
> is the non-umlaut U. It is sooooo very not fussy.
>...
I understand the point, but I'd expect this to be a bad example, since
German {ü} (or French {u}) are (more?) often perceived as /i/. Or may
/u/ and /i/ be mixed without problems in Elomi?
**Henrik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
