Re: [tied] Unvoiced [j]?

>From: Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
>Reply-To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tied] Unvoiced [j]?
>Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 19:08:23 +0200
>
>"Wh" /hw/ is normally pronounced as a voiceless (velarised) bilabial or
>labiovelar fricative in Scots, Scottish English, Irish English and
>non-urban Ulster English. In all varieties of English there are people who
>for one reason or another use the /hw/ pronunciation (more often in the
>major lexical categories than in "wh" pronouns) and believe it to be more
>euphonious or, say, more sophisticated. What's really curious is that the
>initial clusters /hr-/, /hn-/ and /hl-/ lost their aitches already in early
>Middle English, while /hw-/ has somehow managed to survive. Meanwhile,
>English has developed the phonologically parallel sequence /hj-/ (/hju:-/ <
>/hiu-/, as in "hew, huge").
>
>Piotr
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: CeiSerith@...
>To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 6:33 PM
>Subject: Re: [tied] Unvoiced [j]?
>
>
>In a message dated 9/4/2002 5:44:03 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>haha2581@... writes:
>
>Is there an unvoiced counterpart to [w] aswell?
>
>There is said to be one in English, the sound represented by the "wh" at
>the beginning of word such as "wheel," but many, if not most, Americans
>simply voice it. How is it with other dialects of English?
>
>David Fickett-Wilbar
>

In American English, /hw/ is gradually disappearing. I pronounce it, but my
husband does not. it seems to have disappeared from the East Coast; the
disappearance may be moving west. I am from Chicago and my husband is from
New Jersey. A friend from New York had never heard of /wh/ales!
Anne

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com