All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn" > "worn")

Thu Feb 19 17:15:00 UTC 2009

As usual, TZ confuses the right to one's own opinion--however stupid--with a putative right to one's own facts, which only the dim-witted think they have. The objective scientific fact is that there is no [g] in "sung" just as there is no [g] in "sing" (which is why a woman of your acquaintance (or any a five-year-old child, for that matter) can tell whether you are telling her that you'd like to be present when she sings or whether you'd like to be present when she sins. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Zurinskas <truespel at HOTMAIL.COM>
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Sent: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:36 pm
Subject: Re: [ADS-L] All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn" > "worn")

Google on "phoneme" and see the definitions.

I dissagree that the "g" in "sung" is mostly silent as said in sentences.

Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL5+
see truespel.com

----------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:16:27 -0500
> From: laurence.horn at YALE.EDU
> Subject: Re: All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn"> "worn")
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society
> Poster: Laurence Horn
> Subject: Re: All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn">
> "worn")
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> At 9:29 AM +0000 2/17/09, Tom Zurinskas wrote:
>>I see your point, although a "long e" isn't usually though
t of as a schwa.
>>
>>How about when different pronunciations of a
>>word cause changes of meaning, like homonyms,
>>e.g. pronouncing "caught" the same as "cot".
>>Would that not be a "phonemic" change? I think
>>so. However, the meaning has not changed, just
>>the pronunciation; just the phonemes.
>>
>>So I prefer the simple original definition of phoneme as a basic speech sound
>
> That's not the (whole) definition of "phoneme",
> original or otherwise. Contrast (or potential
> contrast), or capability of making a difference
> in meaning, was always part of it, or else
> aspirated and unaspirated [p] would be different
> phonemes. Whose definition are you citing here?
>
>>, not getting into "meaning". The "meaning" of words is a step beyond.
>
> Not in defining phonemes.
>
>> For example, someone could say "Just great" and mean exactly the opposite.
>
> ????
>
>>
>>Between "sun" and "sung" I would say there is an
>>extra "g" sound there in "sung"; Perhaps
>>diminished but surely there, no?
>
> No.
>
>> And if you put it in a sentence "I've sung a song" the "g" pops out stongly.
>>
>
> Not for most English speakers, whence the
> shibboleth of "Lung Guy-land" to characterize one
> regional dialect where the epenthetic /g/ does
> pop up. Your system would encourage representing
> "idea" as containing a final /r/ because it pops
> up for certain non-rhotic speakers who say "the
> idear of it". Of course, the pronunciation of
> such speakers should be represented with that [r]
> in suc
h cases, but I don't think you'd want to
> base an orthography on that practice.
>
> LH
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------
>>> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:21:24 +0800
>>> From: strangeguitars at GMAIL.COM
>>> Subject: Re: All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn"> "worn")
>>> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>>>
>>> ---------------------- Information from the
>>>mail header -----------------------
>>> Sender: American Dialect Society
>>> Poster: Randy Alexander
>>> Subject: Re: All 40 USA English phonemes (Was Re: Eggcorn? "warn">
>>> "worn")
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Tom Zurinskas wrote:
>>>> My bad. I've guess I must have reversed them.
>>>
>>> Good that you're admitting this.
>>>
>>>> What amazes me is that folks call these two
>>>>n's different phonemes and yet they think
>>>>schwa is one phoneme when it is in reality
>>>>many.
>>>
>>> A phoneme is the smallest unit of speech sound that affects *meaning*
>>> in a word. So /n/ and /ng/ are separate phonemes because "sun" and
>>> "sung" have different meanings.
>>>
>>> The different realizations of the schwa don't affect meaning. You can
>>> say "believe" with the first syllable realized as /bee/ or /buh/ or
>>> /bih/, without changing the meaning of the word.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Randy Alexander
>>> Jilin City, China
>>> My Manchu studies blog:
>>> http://www.bjshengr.com/manchu
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Windows Live: Keep your life in sync.
>>http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_022009
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_explore_022009

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

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