LL-L "Phonology" 2002.01.18 (03) [E]
Lowlands-L
sassisch at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 18 21:31:55 UTC 2002
======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 18.JAN.2002 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================
From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Phonology"
> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Phonology
>
> Sandy,
>
> This may be the Scots and Low Saxon /n/ assimilation rule:
>
> |[+conso]| |[a+labi]| |[a+labi]|
> |[+voice]| -> |[+sylla]| / |[-sylla]|__#
> |[+nasal]| |[+high]| |[+high]|
This doesn't seem quite like what I was trying to express,
though I can see I didn't get it right first time! So perhaps
in Low Saxon it's somewhat different, though I can see the
similarities. Working through it all again, I think this
represents the rule I have in mind (perhaps the +/-consonantal
is unnecessary, but I felt it made it clearer):
[-cons][+cons ] -> [+cons ] / [+stress]$[+cons ]____#
[+lax ][+nasal] [+sylla] [-voice]
[-high ] [a high] [a high]
[-labi ] [a labi] [a labi]
This is intended to express lax vowel deletion after a
stressed syllable (possibly better done as a separate
rule feeding into this one) followed by the spreading
of the labial and high features of a preceding voiceless
stop into the [n] (as well as the coronal, back and
anterior features, but these are implied), and the
syllabification of the resulting nasal.
I need the [-voice] because we have for example, "stappin"
and "sabbin" becoming /'sta:p=m/ but we only have /'sabIn/,
not */sa:b=m/ - at least not as far as I've heard.
> I often wonder if in Low Saxon (Low German) one should even
> bother to posit an
> underlying schwa in what is written _-en_, namely if it is not
> just /-n/, and
> if this does not also apply in Scots. As far as I know, a schwa
> or short [e]
> is *never* pronounced in what in Low Saxon is written as _-en_,
> not even in
> slow and deliberate speech or song, at least not in the dialects
> with which I
> am familiar. Thus, the infinitive suffix would be simply /-n/
> (e.g., _kieken_
> /kiik-n/ -> ['k`i:k=N] 'to look'), and in many dialects the present
> participial suffix (/-nd/ >) would also be /-n/ (due to d assimilation and
> eventual loss; e.g., _'n bieten(en) Hund_ 'a biting dog' /biit-n(-n)/).
>
> How about Scots then?
I'm pretty sure we need the schwa in Scots - certainly
there's deletion, but not in the "permanent" sense you
seem to be describing. There's a mode of speech where
schwa's seem to be positively "unreduced", sounding more
like Aitken's Vowel [3]. I would divide the Scots of my
own area into the following registers (speaking about
phonology only), going from most careful speech to least
careful:
No Glottalisation: songs and recitation only, or very
deliberate speech.
Glottalisation: speaking with good enunciation, such
as to a crowd or a stranger. This can also be applied
for songs and recitation.
Schwa-deletion and various assimilation processes: this
is often used in pseudo-phonetic writing to indicate
"gutter Scots", but is in fact the normal mode of
conversation between perfectly respectable Scots speakers.
> By the way, you might like to check out the following site:
> http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/courses/ling210-901/course/phonology/features/
> Items 3 and 4 are particularly useful.
This is very good - one thing I'm don't like, though, is
their preference for [sibilant] over [strident] - I find
[strident] very neat for expressing pluralisation in Scots
and English.
> Apart from the feature outline and the example of Australian English, its
> source code may help you solve the IPA symbol display problem.
> But .. wait! I
> just looked at your phonetics page and saw that you have solved
> the display
> problem. I might come to you for some pointers sometime. "Share the
> intelligence," as one professor of mine liked to say, and as should be the
> motto on Lowlands-L.
Feel free to ask - I've certainly been getting an education
here! Andy is ahead of me as far as unicode fonts are concerned,
though.
Incidentally, I didn't actually do anything to the site between
your complaining about it and your saying it was fixed - that's
my favourite kind of problem!
> I'm glad you have included "tense" as a feature, but I am not so sure if
> "reduced" has a place. As far as I am aware, schwa has a minus
> for all the
> features, thus being the "featureless" default or basic vowel that in the
> absence of primary stress may be inserted or to which other vowels may be
> reduced (by losing their distinctive features).
That does seem better than having a special feature just to
accomodate a unique phoneme.
> Your "Scots Grmmar" project (http://sandyfleemin.org/grammar/) looks very
> promising (and ambitious!) even at this early stage of development.
> Congratulations!
Thanks! I'm doing it as much for myself as for anybody else,
of course.
Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinna dout him, for he says that he
On nae accoont wad ever tell a lee.
- C.W.Wade,
'The Adventures o McNab'
----------
From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Phonlogy"
> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Phonology
>
> Aspiration is a strange and in my opinion insufficiently studied
> thing. It
Ron,
I was quite amazed by this description of aspiration - in
fact I am familiar with Icelandic pre/post-aspiration, but
this gives a lot more food for thought.
> assume, Scots
> it is h-like, thus voiceless. If in Scots it spreads to the
> following glide
> /w/, as in _twist_, I can well imagine that this would cause the
> glide to be
> voiceless, at least at the beginning. This would then explain why Scots
> speakers perceive initial and post-consonantly /w/ as somewhat different.
I tried your excercise illustrating spreading aspiration with
"two" &c and I see what you mean by the puff of air with the
vowel, though, at least the way I perform it, the vowel remains
voiced - of course it has to, but as an amateur I can fall into
the trap of thinking that "devoicing" and "blowing" are the same
thing, but there's a lot more to it than that. Obviously I've got
more thinking to do about /tw/ &c.
I do like your suggestion of writing a superscripted [x] in
[(x)W] - even if only as an interim measure until I can
discover what it really _is_!
Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinna dout him, for he says that he
On nae accoont wad ever tell a lee.
- C.W.Wade,
'The Adventures o McNab'
==================================END===================================
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>.
=======================================================================
* Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Postings 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
=======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list