LL-L: "Phonology" [E] LOWLANDS-L, 23.JUN.1999 (03)

[Lowlands-L Administrator]

 ==========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 23.JUN.1999 (03) * ISSN 1089-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 ==========================================================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 ==========================================================================

From: Alfred Brothers <alfredb at erols.com>
Subject: Phonology

John Feather wrote:

> The discussion of the use of voiced and unvoiced dental suffixes to form the
> past tense of weak verbs (or more accurately, I suppose, the weak past tense
> of verbs) and the raising of  " 't kofschip" reminded me of something which
> I have observed but never seen in print. The observation is that "I have to"
> is commonly pronounced "I haff to", thus with unvoicing of the [v]. I cannot
> think of another example. In Russian and no doubt many other languages this
> unvoicing is perfectly normal: the words are written one way and pronounced
> another.
>
> My questions are:
> 1. Are there other examples in standard English?

One example I can think of occurs in the same verb before "to", i.e., the
devoicing of the -s in 'has (to)'. In American English at least, I frequently
hear
[hæst@] instead of [hæzt@], especially in fast speech. (I think I do it myself.)
Yet
I've never heard the -s devoiced in 'was to' or other verbs ending in /z/.

An interesting point regarding "haff to" < "have to", which seems to be
universal:
In some areas of the U.S., especially the West (not necessarily the West
Coast, but areas around Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming), a new form of the present
participle/gerund of "have" has developed. For example, most speakers from that
area will always
say "without haffin' to..." but will never devoice the 'v' in 'having' if  an
infinitive with "to" doesn't follow. I've heard a few other speakers outside of
that area
do the same, but I have no idea how widespread it is or where else it might
occur
commonly.

Regards,

Alfred Brothers

==================================END=======================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are to
   be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 ========================================================================