Re: History of French
From: Jacques Guy (jguy_at_alphalink.com.au)
Date: 09/18/04
- Next message: John Atkinson: "Re: History of French"
- Previous message: Anti-imperialist: "Re: Nostratic"
- In reply to: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Next in thread: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Mxsmanic: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: History of French"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:30:51 -0700
Peter Dy wrote:
> And you say that no previous instruction in pronunciation is necessary, so
> then how do they understand what "retroflex" and "alveolar ridge" mean?
By pictures I suppose. That is how I was taught the Chinese series
q, j, x versus c, z, s and ch, zh, sh.
Or by seeing it demonstrated, as a New-Hebridean native once
demonstrated to me the difference between the two s's in his
language, although he had no words for "grooved", "lamino-
alveolar", "apico-alveolar", "unvoiced", and "tense".
As for "retroflex" that is an abominable term for "cacuminal".
But alas, it has become the norm. BTW, I knew someone who could
manage a retroflexed apico-nasal stop (my mother). See what I mean?
_I_ can only manage a retroflexed lamino-antedental one (and I am
sure anybody can). Can you guess what it is? Hint: I am using
"retroflexed" as meaning just plain "retroflexed", not "cacuminal".
- Next message: John Atkinson: "Re: History of French"
- Previous message: Anti-imperialist: "Re: Nostratic"
- In reply to: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Next in thread: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Peter Dy: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Mxsmanic: "Re: History of French"
- Reply: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: History of French"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
