Re: Subtitutes for English /T/ and /D/

On Jul 22, 4:16 pm, Dominic Bojarski <dominicbojar...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jul 22, 9:27 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 22, 1:48 pm, Dominic Bojarski <dominicbojar...@xxxxxxxxx>

A) it's phonemic: free/three, brief/breath, whiff/with, fin/thin, vat/
that, fink/think, furrow/thorough, fought/thought.

In the few examples among those pairs that actually do differ only in /
T/ vs. /f/, how would communication be impaired by the substitution?

Perhaps not very much if that were the only pronunciation problem the
speaker had. However, language learners usually have a whole
constellation of pronunciation problems, each of which contributes to
the reduction in ease of communication.

As part of the constellation, the [f v] substitution does indeed
impair communication.

Evidence?

You can only get so many sounds wrong in a word before it becomes
completely unrecognizable. The most notorious example is the inability
to figure out whether the speaker is saying 13, 30, 14 or 40.

Which is nothing but a matter of stress assignment, and nasalization
of the second vowel -- which is phonemic in Polish and hence should be
very easy to teach.

And doesn't come remotely close to supplying evidence for the
contention that "the [f v] substitution does indeed impair
communication."

If you had nothing to say about everything else in my message, why did
you repeat the entire thing?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Subtitutes for English /T/ and /D/
    ... how would communication be impaired by the substitution? ... impair communication. ... brains of some non-native speakers, but not in the brains of native ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Subtitutes for English /T/ and /D/
    ... how would communication be impaired by the substitution? ... impair communication. ... brains of some non-native speakers, but not in the brains of native ...
    (sci.lang)