NS > NTS (was: Re: "war" [wor])

Sat Aug 16 20:02:20 UTC 2008

NIce observation. When I listened to this, the sound I was hearing was
the moraic N of Japanese, which is generally nasalized if not
assimilated. It might be fair to say his pronunciation falls into this
category, but nasalized /i/ is probably a better description. Perhaps
he has some background in French or familiarity with an English
dialect that keeps the distinction.

As to why you would want to disambiguate ns/ts, it was mainly
curiosity. My professor told us years ago that there is a dialect that
does so. At the time, I had serious doubts about his claim, but now I
wish I had inquired more about that dialect. More recently, I began to
wonder if they could be auditorily distinguished. After quite a bit of
practice, I can disambiguate at will and found that the pronunciations
are very distinct once you know how to listen. BB

On Aug 15, 2008, at 7:48 AM, Wilson Gray wrote:

>
> FWIW, Benjamin, it sounds to me that Roel "cheats." That is, he merely
> nasalizes the /i/ instead of fully articulating the /n/. Nevertheless,
> I do believe that it's possible to pronounce /ns/ as [ns]. Indeed, I
> believe (my experience has been that you have to listen to yourself on
> tape, if you want to hear what your speech *really* sounds like) that
> *I* can disambiguate "prince" and "prints" by pronouncing them
> differently: [prIns] vs. [prInts]. But why? The two words always occur
> in completely different contexts. It would be like teaching oneself to
> distinguish "leach" from "leech" by pronouncing the former as [liItS]
> or some such. Most people wouldn't notice and most of those who did
> notice wouldn't care.
>
> -Wilson
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Benjamin Barrett <gogaku at ix.netcom.com
> > wrote:
>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> -----------------------
>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> Poster:       Benjamin Barrett <gogaku at IX.NETCOM.COM>
>> Subject:      NS > NTS (was: Re: "war" [wor])
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> That reminds me: in the not-too-distance past, TZ argued that there
>> is
>> no "t" sound in words like "since" and "prince."
>>
>> My first phonetics professor held that there is a prestige dialect
>> that maintains the "ns" pronunciation, thus differentiating "prince"
>> from "prints" (a pursuit that TZ should be greatly interested in). I
>> recently found a great example, pronounced by the Netherlander pop
>> singer Roel van Velzen in "When Summer Ends." The song video can be
>> seen (and heard) at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWkBMbhAYPM. It
>> starts right off with his t-less pronunciation of "since".
>>
>> Is this a feature of Dutch, or is it something he more likely learned
>> in school? BB
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2008, at 11:06 PM, Benjamin Barrett wrote:
>>
>>> His point seems merely to be that the term is a misnomer because it
>>> does not adequately describe what it does.
>>>
>>> There seems to be nothing wrong with the term "minimally different
>>> phonetic pair" except that it is not the jargon used in actual
>>> practice. His comment seems to be aimed at stirring up trouble.
>>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)
>>> for a description of such behavior. BB
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2008, at 10:59 PM, LanDi Liu wrote:
>>>
>>>> To be a little more specific to the neophyte (TZ), "minimal pair"
>>>> is a
>>>> technical term that describes two words (a "pair") that have a very
>>>> small pronunciation difference; for ex. "shit" and "sheet".
>>>> Minimal
>>>> pairs are heavily used in ESL teaching to help learners distinguish
>>>> between words that sound similar to non native speakers: "Your
>>>> sheet
>>>> is on my bed" vs "Your shit is on my bed".
>>>>
>>>> "Pair" and "dare" are not minimal pairs because the difference ([p]
>>>> vs
>>>> [d]) involve different places of articulation, so the difference is
>>>> not "minimal".
>>>>
>>>> "Shit" and "sheet" are minimal pairs because both vowels are high
>>>> front vowels, with the second higher and fronter than the first.
>>>>
>>>> Randy
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Gordon, Matthew J.
>>>> <GordonMJ at missouri.edu> wrote:
>>>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>>>> Poster:       "Gordon, Matthew J." <GordonMJ at MISSOURI.EDU>
>>>>> Subject:      Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Minimal pair is exactly what Charlie is describing since he
>>>>> maintains =
>>>>> the historical distinction between the vowels of 'for' and 'four'.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: American Dialect Society on behalf of Tom Zurinskas
>>>>> Sent: Thu 8/14/2008 9:32 PM
>>>>> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>>>>> Subject:      Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>> =20
>>>>> Minimal pair is actually a misnomer.  It should be minimally
>>>>> different =
>>>>> phonetic pair.  It's the case where one sound is different, such
>>>>> as pair =
>>>>> and dare.
>>>>>
>> On Aug 14, 2008, at 11:06 PM, Benjamin Barrett wrote:
>>
>>> His point seems merely to be that the term is a misnomer because it
>>> does not adequately describe what it does.
>>>
>>> There seems to be nothing wrong with the term "minimally different
>>> phonetic pair" except that it is not the jargon used in actual
>>> practice. His comment seems to be aimed at stirring up trouble.
>>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)
>>> for a description of such behavior. BB
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2008, at 10:59 PM, LanDi Liu wrote:
>>>
>>>> To be a little more specific to the neophyte (TZ), "minimal pair"
>>>> is a
>>>> technical term that describes two words (a "pair") that have a very
>>>> small pronunciation difference; for ex. "shit" and "sheet".
>>>> Minimal
>>>> pairs are heavily used in ESL teaching to help learners distinguish
>>>> between words that sound similar to non native speakers: "Your
>>>> sheet
>>>> is on my bed" vs "Your shit is on my bed".
>>>>
>>>> "Pair" and "dare" are not minimal pairs because the difference ([p]
>>>> vs
>>>> [d]) involve different places of articulation, so the difference is
>>>> not "minimal".
>>>>
>>>> "Shit" and "sheet" are minimal pairs because both vowels are high
>>>> front vowels, with the second higher and fronter than the first.
>>>>
>>>> Randy
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Gordon, Matthew J.
>>>> <GordonMJ at missouri.edu> wrote:
>>>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>>>> Poster:       "Gordon, Matthew J." <GordonMJ at MISSOURI.EDU>
>>>>> Subject:      Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Minimal pair is exactly what Charlie is describing since he
>>>>> maintains =
>>>>> the historical distinction between the vowels of 'for' and 'four'.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: American Dialect Society on behalf of Tom Zurinskas
>>>>> Sent: Thu 8/14/2008 9:32 PM
>>>>> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>>>>> Subject:      Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>> =20
>>>>> Minimal pair is actually a misnomer.  It should be minimally
>>>>> different =
>>>>> phonetic pair.  It's the case where one sound is different, such
>>>>> as pair =
>>>>> and dare.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL5+
>>>>> See truespel.com - and the 4 truespel books plus "Occasional
>>>>> Poems" at =
>>>>> authorhouse.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:51:32 -0400
>>>>>> From: cdoyle at UGA.EDU
>>>>>> Subject: Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>>> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header =
>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>>> Sender: American Dialect Society
>>>>>> Poster: Charles Doyle
>>>>>> Subject: Re: "war" [wor]
>>>>>> =
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
>>>>> ------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes; "for"/"four" are a minimal pair!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Charlie
>>>>>> _____________________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> All say, "How hard it is that we have to die"---a strange complaint to
> come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
> -----
> -Mark Twain
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org