Re: Your first "linguistic" memory

Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>
> Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:07:16 GMT: "Peter T. Daniels"
> <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
>
> >> Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:29:24 GMT: "Peter T. Daniels"
> >> <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
> >> >So the Dutch manufacturers invented a trademark that couldn't be
> >> >pronounced in Dutch?
> >>
> >> Did I ever say, write or suggest that????????????
> >
> >You said "Is FAL really a Dutch word?", which certainly suggests you
> >think it isn't.
>
> Two different things. Many words can be devised that are perfectly
> pronounceable in Dutch, but that aren't Dutch words. Same in any
> language. In English: zote, doat, zilly, dentionsate, trare, and
> thousands more. Irrelevant.

Invented words of a language follow the phonotactics of that language.

You can't invent a word like "pfilt" or "zbardi" and claim it's English.
(They'd work in German and Italian respectively.)

> >So the Dutch manufacturers invented a trademark that couldn't be
> >pronounced in Dutch?
>
> Just to get things straight: it wasn't a Dutch invention, but Belgian,
> http://www.surplusrifle.com/fal/index.asp , and the acronym is from
> French: "Fusil Automatique Leger", light automatic rifle.
>
> >> Not quite the same thing, seeing that here in NL, civilians may only
> >> carry guns with special permits.
> >
> >What makes you think that's not so in the US?
>
> It's commonly believed here that anyone in the US and Brazil, whose's
> over a certain age, can buy rifles. Not true? What is all the fuss
> about then? http://www.csgv.org/ . National Rifle Association?

There are 50 states and thousands of municipalities, all of which can
make their own rules. There are no broad national regulations, because
of fear of the Second Amendment.

> >> Phonemes are what make words sound different,
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >> and makes different
> >> meanings recognizable.
> >
> >I don't know what that means.
>
> If I say "veil", then "fail", the listener knows they're different
> words, because the difference between [f] and [v] is phonemic, and /f/
> and /v/ are phonemes. So the phonemic difference between the phones
> distinguishes the different meanings.

That doesn't "make different meanings recognizable." It distinguishes
words.

> >> Other differences can exist, they are
> >> allophonic, they follow from the vicinity of other phonemes
> >> (assimilation), or from position (initial, medial, final etc.)
> >
> >I don't know what that means.
>
> Final Dutch or Russian /d/ is [t].

That's "neutralization."

> Turkish /k/ before /i/ or /y/ gets
> palatalised. Final /t/ or /t/ before other consonants in same syllable
> becomes [?] in many kinds of colloquial British English.
> Japanese /t/ becomes [ts] before /u/, and /tS/ before /i/.
> Japanese [h] and [F] (bilabial fricative, symbol may also be [P]) are
> together in a single phoneme.

That's "assimilation."

> Pirahã /b/ may just as well sound as [m]. Striking examples here:
> http://archive.phonetics.ucla.edu/Language/MYP/MYP.html
> Etc. etc.

If it comes from Dan Everett, then (following Jacques Guy) I prefer not
to believe any of it.

> Do you really not understand this (seems very unlikely), or was my
> description so clumsy? (possible)

It was irrelevant to the definition of "phoneme."

> >> Then a language has differences between words, that are not phonemic
> >> and not allophonic, but they are just there for no apparent reason.
> >> And they are passed on to new generations, although the difference
> >> does not distinguish meaning in any way. Isn't that strange? Does it
> >> mean I misunderstand phonemes when I find that remarkable?
> >
> >I have no idea what you're talking about in this entire paragraph.
>
> I don't know how to make it clear in any other way. I tried twice. It
> must be my limited English then?

You have no examples of "differences between words, that are not
phonemic"?

Of course not, since if words sound different, they necessarily form at
least a minimal pair.

> >Then your division of Koninkrijk into Rijksdelen; Aruba; and Antillen
> >was incorrect.
>
> Probably. It is like it is. I didn't set the whole thing up. If you
> don't like it, I cannot help you.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Articulation of /s/ in baths
    ... because in Dutch is more or less just an assimilated ... If the do in some other language, ... I think such combinations also occur in English. ... In your view of what phonemes are, this is not a question, but a clear ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Articulation of /s/ in baths
    ... because in Dutch is more or less just an assimilated ... If the do in some other language, ... If you were talking about phonemes, you would be using a Firthian ... I think such combinations also occur in English. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: BBC does it again
    ... One reason might be so that everyone's notation for a given language variety is the same, independent of what model they espouse. ... I understand that some people think length is the distinctive feature in those pairs of Dutch vowels, others claim it's lax vs tense, or amount of openness and/or frontness. ... Most linguists involved with writing Dutch phonemically aren't super-interested in which model is "correct", but they would find it convenient if there was one accepted notation for the phonemes of Dutch. ... distinguished by shape as well as by length as in Ruud's representation of Dutch sounds, so I accept that this is done, and that perhaps the point is that it's a model used *consistently* for Dutch--and it certainly is one more demonstration of the unfounded nature of Peter's contention that this is an unused practice and one that won't be understood. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Your first "linguistic" memory
    ... >>> They are different all right, but is FAL really a Dutch word? ... > Phonemes are what make words sound different, ... The islands are Aruba, Bonaire, ... You said that the Caribbean islands are not Netherlands possessions, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: BBC does it again
    ... phonemic representation one chooses to use ought to ... One reason might be so that everyone's notation for a given language variety is the same, independent of what model they espouse. ... I understand that some people think length is the distinctive feature in those pairs of Dutch vowels, others claim it's lax vs tense, or amount of openness and/or frontness. ... Most linguists involved with writing Dutch phonemically aren't super-interested in which model is "correct", but they would find it convenient if there was one accepted notation for the phonemes of Dutch. ...
    (sci.lang)
Quantcast