Paraplegic.

[Douglas G. Wilson]

At 03:40 PM 4/17/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Herb Stahlke <hstahlke at GW.BSU.EDU> writes:
>
> >>>>>
>This sounds like a variant on the "athalete" or "fillum" pronunciations we
>were warned away from in elementary school (50 years ago).  I can see why
>both those l's would become syllabic, since thl and lm are not comfortable
>clusters for a lot of English speakers, but I'm not sure why pl would be a
>problem.
><<<<<
>
>Compare "puh-lease!". I theorize... well, I suspect that the heavy
>aspiration of syllable-initial non-postconsonantal /p/ has one or both of
>the following effects on the /l/:
>
>1. The first part of the /l/ devoices so strongly that many hearers
>perceive it as a [phonetically devoiced] vowel and internalize the phonemic
>pronunciation of the word as having a schwa at that point.
>
>2. The flow of air is strong enough to hinder and delay the formation of
>the tongue contact until after the start of voicing, creating an actual
>voiced vocalic segment between the [ph] and the [l].

This seems about right. /l/ tends to try to make a syllable for itself in
other contexts too, I think. E.g., the dictionary shows both /ril/ and
/ri at l/ for "real" (are they really distinct?) but only /ril/ for "reel" (do
some speakers really effectively distinguish this from "real"?).

But do those who say "parapalegic" also say "apopalectic" or "interpalanetary"?

>I see a cause similar to #2 for the change of /fT/ to /pT/ (T = theta),
>with resultant mis/// change of spelling, in "naphtha" and "diphthong". [f]
>physically prevents the articulation of an interdental theta until the
>speaker thrusts his tongue-tip through and makes a catapult of his lower
>lip*, but even with a dental (not inter-) theta the airflow causes a (to
>me) palpable difficulty in the articulation.

More demanding cases: "phthalic", with /f/ usually silenced; "phthiriasis",
"phthisic", with /f/ virtually always silenced.

-- Doug Wilson