From: tgpedersen
Message: 22472
Date: 2003-06-02
>the
> On Sat, 31 May 2003, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >
> > > I have been taken to task for not producing exact parallels for
> > > voice-governed e/o alternation, and funnily not for making itvoice-
> > > governed, but for connecting that fact in turn with the tone.Now,
> > Ithe
> > > actually don't know of *any* other cases of a voice-governed
> > > alternation e/o, so the "low incidence" of the association with
> > > tone is not of much relevance.by my
> >
> > I was wondering if Swedish 'dom' vs. Danish 'dem' "them" might be
> > relevant here (both alternating with schwa!), Swedish voiced stops
> > being more voiced than their Danish counterparts (which actually
> > aren't)?
>
> I'm afraid this is very far from meeting the requirements set to me
> critics. They want (he wants) me to point to fifty other languageswith
> a history known over millennia as safely containing a comparablechange
> of /e/ to /o/ (vel sim.) in dependency of the voicing properties ofthe
> following segment and independent of the accent (although theunaccented
> last-mentioned requirement is erroneously replaced by "when
> only"). I am being rebuked for the "low incidence" of such examples;trouble
> frankly, I don't think they have any incidence. Also I would have
> trusting anybody claiming anything on such a basis which is justoutside
> our reach.Glen might want fifty examples (and once he gets them, he'll want
>