Re: [tied] Re: Glen, regarding...

At 6:44:18 PM on Thursday, October 9, 2003, m_iacomi wrote:

> Brian M. Scott wrote:

>> At 9:45:29 AM on Thursday, October 9, 2003, Patrick C.
>> Ryan wrote:

>>> Let us take a concrete example. If a certain segment of a
>>> population substitutes a fricative (/f/) for an aspirated
>>> stop (/pH/), we can make one of two basic assumptions:
>>> that segment finds it difficult (or impossible) to
>>> replicate /pH/; or that segment does not properly hear
>>> /pH/, and cannot distinguish it from /f/. Both scenarios
>>> imply physical causes.

>> No, they don't.

> Actually, they might have also some physical causes:

Yes, but that's beside the point that I was making: while
there may be physical causes, the scenario does not in fact
*imply* that there are.

Brian