Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 04:52:41 -0700
On Oct 4, 3:49 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 4, 7:31 am, "John Atkinson" <johna...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No, it LOOKS German. (Well, not really. That <-zy> is hardly common in
German, is it?) It SOUNDS just the same with <k> as it does with <c>.
Any German that knows English would know that the <c>s in crazy cat are
pronounced exactly the same as the <k>s in krazy kat. And any German
(though not all Swiss) would pronounce <k> in German the same way as
both <c> and <k> in English.
For ALL English speakers (not just Americans), the sounds represented in
spelling by <f> and <c> are EXACTLY the same as those represented by
<ph> and <k> respectively. Why can't you accept that English spelling
often represents the same sound by different letters?
Someone who wants to become Swiss must absolve a test
and pronounce the hereabouts famous word Chuchichäschdli
(small kitchen trunk), for you something like khookykhaeshdly.
Almost everyone fails, and especially the English and Americans.
They simply kan't pronounce that rough kh. You kan't make
a difference between c and k, between f and ph, as the
Japanese can't discern between l and r ---they need three
weeks of intensive training to hear and make a difference
between r and l. They must re-programm their brain.
The sounds of a language are acquired in early childhood,
and it happens that the initially well connected neurons
are by and by disconnected in specific ways. With those
proceeding disconnections the ability to discern between
l and r goes lost in Japanese, and in the same way the
ability of discerning between c and k, and between ph
and f, goes lost in English raised people. Why can't you
get this?
Because it's not true.
I said it before, and more than once.
We tell you over and over that just because you assert something over
and over doesn't make it true.
And if
you kan't afford a three-week-intensive course in
learning to discern between c and k, and again three
weeks for re-programming your neurons in order to
get the diphpherence between ph and f, you may try
the physiological approach I favor and develop in
here: the difference between ph and f consists
in a different pressure of the lower lip against the
upper front teeth.
And if you ever proved to be a serious researcher with demonstrated
acnievements in (say) phonetics research, then if you publish evidence
that "different pressure of the lower lip against the upper front
teeth" is ever significant in any language of the world, i.e. that the
distinction is phonemic, or even that it's a systematic distinction in
articulation between any two languages, the mastery of which is
essential in overcoming a foreign accent in some language, then you
would be entitled to propose a distinctive notation for the supposed
two different speech-sounds. (But it would be ill-advised to choose
<ph> for one of them, as that symbol already has a meaning in
phonetics, to wit an aspirated bilabial stop.)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- References:
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Aidan Kehoe
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: John Atkinson
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- Next by Date: Re: How to prime kids to learn 3+ languages?
- Previous by thread: Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- Next by thread: Re: Fr/lat/ru tu-vous/tu-vos/ - : etymology ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|