Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)
From: LEE Sau Dan (danlee_at_informatik.uni-freiburg.de)
Date: 07/16/04
- Next message: Ron Hardin: "Re: The clause "which xxx to [verb]" is short for "the question of which ...""
- Previous message: LEE Sau Dan: "Re: Comparing languages"
- In reply to: Tak To: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Next in thread: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Reply: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Reply: Tak To: "re: Cantonese and English vowel lengths (Re: Esperantist lies)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 16 Jul 2004 10:32:37 +0200
>>>>> "Tak" == Tak To <takto@alum.mit.edu.-> writes:
Tak> Sean O'Leathlobhair wrote:
>> LSD's last note gave the impression that he had not been taught
>> the rules for English vowels e.g. why "i" is short in "sit" but
>> long in "site". If this is right then it may explain why he
>> thinks that English is so unphonetic.
But I did know the rule. I've discovered that rule some 20 years ago.
Tak> This is further complicated by the fact that to most
Tak> Cantonese ears, the two vowel sounds differ more in quality
Tak> ([aI] vs [I]) than in length(*).
I think Cantonese [aI] (I would say it's [@j] or [@i]) and [I] are in
complementary distribution. Syllables with an [aI] final can't end in
a consonant (/p/, /t/, /k/, /m/, /n/, /ng/). Syllables having an [I]
must end in a velar consonant (/k/, /ng/). So, I can't find any
minimal pairs to support your claim. But I think you're right: both
[aI] and [I] _sound_ short to _me_.
Tak> Thus the term "long" and "short" are somewhat meaningless.
Phonemically, only long and short /a/ are distinguished, and they have
different qualities to our ears: [@] vs. [a:]. So, it may be even
simpler to say they're two vowels /@/ vs. /a/ and forget about vowel
length altogether. However, for phonetics and for foreigners to learn
the Cantonese pronunciation accurately, one cannot avoid the parameter
of vowel length.
Tak> (*) Another complication is that in Cantonese, all syllables
Tak> ending with -t (and -k and -p) are (relatively speaking)
Tak> short,
No. That's wrong. Remember how the "middle entering" tone [5] split
off from the "high entering" tone [3]? It's determined by vowel
length: a long vowel gives the ME tone; a short vowel goes with the HE
tone. There are few exceptions. And amazingly, this distribution of
HE/ME tone depending on vowel length does coincide with that of
Zhuang!
examples:
[b@k5] = north [ba:k3] = hundred
[f@t5] = suddenly [fa:t3] = to develop
[h@p5] = coincidently [ha:p3] = narrow
[d@p5] = to drip [da:p3] = to answer
[s@t5] = to lose [sa:t3] = to kill
Tak> to the extend that most Cantonese perceive "site" and "sign"
Tak> to have different vowel sounds (something like [aI] vs
Tak> [a:I]).
To me, the former sounds more like [@i] than [aI]. And the latter
sound more like [a:i].
Tak> Btw, I myself was taught informally by a teacher (in Hong
Tak> Kong) that the mute "e" signifies that the previous vowel
Tak> should be pronounced "in the original sound", meaning how the
Tak> letter is pronounced in an alphabetical list (i.e., "aye",
Tak> "yee", "eye", "oh", "you").
This is just another way to say "long vowel", if you understand the
historical development of why the letter names are pronounced the way
they are now. Which is easier to understand? I don't know.
A more difficult one is: sulphite vs. sulphide.
(American English: replace "ph" by "f".)
--
Lee Sau Dan +Z05biGVm- ~{@nJX6X~}
E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee
- Next message: Ron Hardin: "Re: The clause "which xxx to [verb]" is short for "the question of which ...""
- Previous message: LEE Sau Dan: "Re: Comparing languages"
- In reply to: Tak To: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Next in thread: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Reply: Sean O'Leathlobhair: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Reply: Tak To: "re: Cantonese and English vowel lengths (Re: Esperantist lies)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
