There are 10 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Greek Y
From: R A Brown
2a. OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: And Rosta
2b. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Gary Shannon
2c. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Sai
2d. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Tim Smith
2e. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Tony Harris
2f. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Herman Miller
2g. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: Roger Mills
3a. Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Sai
3b. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Gary Shannon
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Greek Y
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:12 am ((PST))
On 11/02/2013 16:18, David McCann wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:54:14 +0100 BPJ <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Interestingly there is evidence that there were some
>> dialects of modern Greek, one of them that of Athens,
>> where /y/ of whaever origin merged with /u/ instead of
>> /i/ but apparently they all went extinct with the
>> influx of eastern Greek refugees early in the 20th
>> century.
>
> That's Tsakonian in the Morea, not yet extinct. It's
> directly descended from Doric.
Glad it's still extant. But there does seem to be
disagreement among scholars about how much is derived from
'pure' Doric and how much shows Koine influence. The
apparent reflex of /u/ for Koine /y/ is considered by some
to be due to and intermediate /ju/ <-- /y/.
Certainly in Koine does seem to have affected all dialects,
so it would not be surprising if there was a mix; possible
some instances of /u/are survivals of Doric and some are
pronunciation of Koine /y/ as [ju] by Doric speakers. It
seems a matter of debate.
> The Old Athenian dialect is a different matter. That
> died out when Athens replaced Nafplio as the capital and
> was filled with migrants from the Morea. If I remember
> correctly, OA was characterised by /k/ > /č/ before
> front vowels, among other things.
A common feature - it's still there in Cretan Greek, where
even the French _kilo_ is pronounced /ʧilo/ :)
=========================================
On 11/02/2013 17:20, BPJ wrote:
> I said that /y/ whether from υ υι or οι merged with /u/
> rather than /i/, not that they preserved ancient /u/.
> Only Tsakonian did that.
Even that, apparently, is debated. I'm not saying whether
/y/ did or did not merge with /u/ - I'd just be happier with
clear examples.
[snip]
> dialect showed e.g. initial /ju/ from */y/. Front vowels
> can be simply retracted. It happened e.g. in some
> dialects of Emglish. "Cudgel" is a dialect form of OE
> "cycgel" which found its way into standard English.
Yes, the common pronunciation of _déja vu_ as "day-zhah voo"
(which really does make me wince) constantly reminds me.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
for individual beings and events."
[Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:50 pm ((PST))
A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish COT from
CAUGHT:
I. Which of the following statements is truest:
In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
(1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all such
words
(2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all such
words
(3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all such
words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
(4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the CAUGHT vowel
in other such words.
II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
--And.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:26 pm ((PST))
None of the above.
I say FATHER and BOTHER with the same vowel.
I say COT and CAUGHT with different vowels.
I say STOMP with the COT vowel, but MONK with the DRUNK vowel, HONK
with the CAUGHT vowel, and WONK with COT vowel. So there are three
different ways I say <-onk> words.
--gary
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:48 PM, And Rosta <[email protected]> wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish COT
> from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the CAUGHT
> vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
>
>
> --And.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Sai" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:27 pm ((PST))
I'm not a field linguist so I have no idea what the perceptual
distribution is, but I am a person with that rhyme distinction.
All -omp/k words Alex could think of have the same vowel to me. It's
pretty close to to COT but a little different, and very distinct from
CAUGHT and FATHER.
So… none of the below. :-P You sure you have your orientation correct,
if you're a cot/caught collapser?
- Sai
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:48 PM, And Rosta <[email protected]> wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish COT
> from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the CAUGHT
> vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
>
>
> --And.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Tim Smith" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:47 pm ((PST))
I'm one of the people in question, and I'd say option 4 is correct. For
me, "cot" has the same vowel as "father" and "bother" and "caught" has a
very different vowel, both backer and rounder. "Stomp" for me has the
same vowel as "cot" and "bonk" has the same vowel as "caught". I'm not
sure if the difference depends on whether the word ends with "mp" or
"nk"; I'm having trouble coming up with enough examples of either to
feel comfortable making a generalization.
- Tim
On 2/11/2013 8:48 PM, And Rosta wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish
> COT from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the
> CAUGHT vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
>
>
> --And.
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Tony Harris" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:56 pm ((PST))
Not sure about the "everyone" thing, but I can say I am type 2.
Interesting you should bring this up, as I had a friend commenting on
the COT / CAUGHT thing to me just yesterday. She looked very strangely
at me when she realized that I do, in fact, say those two words
differently. Not a common thing in the Vermont accent, and one of those
things in my accent that place it as more Western Massachusetts than
Central Vermont.
On 02/11/2013 08:48 PM, And Rosta wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish
> COT from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in
> all such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in
> all such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in
> all such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the
> CAUGHT vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
>
>
> --And.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2f. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:56 pm ((PST))
On 2/11/2013 8:48 PM, And Rosta wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish
> COT from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the
> CAUGHT vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
4.
I have FATHER (or COT) in all -omp words and CAUGHT (or CLOTH) in at
least a few -onk words: "bonk", "honk", "honky-tonk". "Cronk" (a
character in the Ratchet & Clank games) has the FATHER vowel, but proper
names are often exceptions to rules. Other -onk words (like "wonk") can
go either way. I assume you're not counting "monk" (which has a
different vowel).
I have the FATHER-BOTHER merger and the LOT-CLOTH split but not the
COT-CAUGHT merger. I.e.
/A/ FATHER, BOTHER, LOT, COT
/O/ CLOTH, CAUGHT
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
2g. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "Roger Mills" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:08 pm ((PST))
--- On Mon, 2/11/13, Herman Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/11/2013 8:48 PM, And Rosta wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish
> COT from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the
> CAUGHT vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
4.
I have FATHER (or COT) in all -omp words and CAUGHT (or CLOTH) in at least a
few -onk words: "bonk", "honk", "honky-tonk". "Cronk" (a character in the
Ratchet & Clank games) has the FATHER vowel, but proper names are often
exceptions to rules. Other -onk words (like "wonk") can go either way. I assume
you're not counting "monk" (which has a different vowel).
I have the FATHER-BOTHER merger and the LOT-CLOTH split but not the COT-CAUGHT
merger. I.e.
/A/ FATHER, BOTHER, LOT, COT
/O/ CLOTH, CAUGHT
==================================================
I'm with Herman on these, but "wonk" always has [O] chez moi. So does "donkey"
but of course that's not in the same category......
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Sai" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:14 pm ((PST))
See discussion in comments @
https://plus.google.com/103112149634414554669/posts/hQxeizKUaLS for
some starters.
Also, where are the results of the previous Lunatic Surveys I tried
looking for them to grab the gender ratio stat but couldn't find it.
:-/
- Sai
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:30 pm ((PST))
For my money, quality trumps quantity, and it's my humble opinion (as
a male conlanger) that female conlangers have created some
significantly better conlangs. (Don't ask me to explain my criteria.
This is just my gut reaction: "Women's conlangs are, as a rule, better
conlangs.")
--gary
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Sai <[email protected]> wrote:
> See discussion in comments @
> https://plus.google.com/103112149634414554669/posts/hQxeizKUaLS for
> some starters.
>
> Also, where are the results of the previous Lunatic Surveys I tried
> looking for them to grab the gender ratio stat but couldn't find it.
> :-/
>
> - Sai
Messages in this topic (2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> 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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
