Re: What's the different between /tS/ as one phoneme and as two?

From: Brian M. Scott (b.scott_at_csuohio.edu)
Date: 07/21/04 

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:28:24 -0400

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:28:14 +0200 Mxsmanic
<mxsmanic@hotmail.com> wrote in
<news:6drsf0dv50dmmck8n2018n0mmtq0jhmaqh@4ax.com> in
sci.lang:

> Brian M. Scott writes:

>> As you've been told, it is extremely difficult to
>> acquire a completely native accent as an adult.

> No, I've been told that it's impossible, even though I know this isn't
> true. I can easily accept "extremely difficult," but not "impossible,"
> because the latter conflicts with observation.

But you've already demonstrated that your observation isn't
to be trusted.

>> A very good one can be managed, if one has both a good ear
>> and the ability to produce the sounds that one hears, but
>> one that is indistinguishable from a native accent is
>> extremely rare.

> I dunno. Some individual variations in pronunciation are larger than
> some foreign accents.

Irrelevant. The foreignness of an accent has more to do
with the kind of variation than with the degree.

> For example, would you say that Louis Jourdan has
> an accent? What about Rutger Hauer?

I have no idea who Louis Jourdan is, and I can't recall
having heard Hauer.

>> Much the same muscles are used in cycling and running, too,
>> but if you switch from one sport to the other, you'll find
>> that you need to retrain them -- and that's a comparatively
>> easy switch.

> You need to retrain your brain, not your muscles.

Obviously. I was using everyday language, in which it is
perfectly acceptable to refer to the learning of new motor
skills as training one's muscles.

>> The same muscles are used to play the piano
>> and to type, but it being an accomplished typist doesn't
>> make you an accomplished pianist or vice versa.

> The only difference is in the signals sent by the brain.

The important point is that these are largely *unconscious*.
(And what you say is probably not literally true anyway,
since the strength and flexibility requirements are
different.)

>> Have you never encountered the concept of muscle memory?

> Oh yes, I've heard all those weird excuses for not being able to achieve
> native fluency,

Oh, native *fluency* isn't a great problem; many people
manage that. That has nothing to do with acquiring a native
*accent*, however.

> coming mostly from linguists who have poor aptitude for
> languages themselves.

Goodness, but you're ignorant! Muscle memory, also and more
accurately called motor memory, is hardly the invention of
linguists.

[...]

>> It's both, but in large part it's a matter of how the vocal
>> apparatus is held: the muscle tensions are different, as
>> anyone with half an ear can tell.

> That's psychological. The tensions are produced by signals coming from
> the brain. The vocal apparatus holds whatever tensions it's told to
> hold.

Ah, I see: you don't understand the word 'psychological'.
It is not normally used of motor processes, especially at
the unconscious level.

>> Very few can.

> Most singers can, from what I've heard. Even people with very thick
> speaking accents can often sing without an accent.

More evidence of a tin ear.

[...]

>> And judging by what you've
>> been saying here, you have a tin ear and are unlikely to
>> notice small imperfections anyway.

> From the tests I've done a few times, I apparently have perfect pitch.

Irrelevant.

Relevant Pages
Loading