From: Patrick C. Ryan
Message: 19233
Date: 2003-02-25
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 1:36 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:45:26 -0600, "Patrick C. Ryan"
> <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> >[PCR]
> >Wrong. A "stop" consists of both closure and release. If there is voicing before closure, during closure, or even after closure (after release), or all three, the stop is voiced.
>
> Exactly. All the accounts of initial b-, d-, g- in English agree
> there is no voicing before closure,
[PCR]
That is not true.
there is no voicing during most of
> the closure,
[PCR]
And that does NOT make the stop "voiceless". Even if you want to consider only stops that are voiced prior to, during closure, and after release, as ideally "voiced", then English initial "voiced" stops are partially voiced.
>and there is voicing after the closure (in the following
> vowel or resonant).
[PCR]
Voicing after closure may be absorbed by the following vwel or resonant but it also occurs as a discrete element in some dialects.
> >>An ensuing
> >> vowel is fully voiced (unlike what's the case with initial p-, t-, k-,
> >> where the initial segment of the vowel or resonant is devoiced).
[PCR]
This is utter programmatic nonsense. Easily disproved. If we have a FINAL aspirated stop, what is being devoiced?
> >[PCR]
> >Wrong again. The initial segment of the vowel is not devoiced, rather aspiration is introduced between the release and vowel.
>
> Aspiration = devoicing.
[PCR]
Only in your idiosyncratic analysis.
Pat
PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@... (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío, geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit, hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)