Re: Your first "linguistic" memory

Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>
> Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:23:49 GMT: "Peter T. Daniels"
> <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
>
> >> >You say there are minimal pairs. Why is there any question at all?
> >> The minimal pairs are unconvincing.
>
> >How can a minimal pair be "unconvincing"?
>
> Seldom-used loans, strange combinations of words versus single words,
> (Dutch "ga, os!" (go, oxen!) vs. "chaos") word pairs that are
> different for some, but not for others, or that hardly anybody ever
> uses. Names vs. real word, e.g. Dutch "val" vs. the brand name of a
> particular gun: FAL. Do they count?

If you know that "val" (whatever that is) and FAL are different words,
then of course they count. "ga, os!" vs. "gaos" involve a morpheme
boundary, so either they do or they don't depending on your theory.

> I don't have time to go into enough detail to explain it all.
> I have this page http://rudhar.com/lingtics/szfvgch.htm about it, but
> it is in Dutch. See also http://rudhar.com/fonetics/fvw.htm .
>
> >> >For your third example, are you claiming that there is no difference
> >> >between '60' and '16'? How do you do business?
> >>
> >> Haha. Do you have a serious reply too?
> >
> >You claimed that there is no phonemic difference between the two words.
> >How is that not a serious question?
>
> <zestien> = [zEstin]
> <zestig> = [sest@X], because it was once t'zestig.
> Clearer now?

Not at all. How are [-Estin] and [-est@X] even remotely similar? What is
your phonemicization of those two words?

> >If you've never heard of Chomsky & Halle, *The Sound Pattern of English*
> >(1968), you _really_ need to learn some linguistics.
>
> Yes. Thanks for the information.
>
> >Its analysis is
> >based in Halle's *The Sound Pattern of Russian* (1959), which was the
> >founding document of generative phonology and remains unconvincing to
> >this day.
>
> >> >If you hunt around, you may well find a (pre-Hallean, of course)
> >> >analysis of Portuguese by Fred Agard. (He liked to give class examples
> >> >from Papiamento.)
> >>
> >> Different languages.
> >
> >Sigh. He came to the study of Papiamento (do you even know what that
> >is?)
>
> Hahaha. Of course I do. It's spoken on islands that belong to the same
> kingdom as the Netherlands itself, remember? Every common libabry has
> books about it here.

(What kingdom do both the Netherlands and Aruba/Bonaire/Curaçao belong
to?)

> >_because_ he was a scholar of Portuguese. He also wrote a compact
> >introduction to Romance linguistics, so you might find a descriptivist
> >account of Portuguese there.
>
> Interesting.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.

Quantcast