Re: [tied] Re: Schwa (Was PIE Reconstruction)

----- Original Message -----

From: david_russell_watson

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 8:47 PM

Subject: [tied] Re: Schwa (Was PIE Reconstruction)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@......>
wrote:
>
>   We really do not know if  PIE *d was dental or alveolar as far
> as point of articulation was concerned.

Their reflexes are dental in the modern Iranian languages,
in the modern Indo-Aryan languages (except where retroflex),
in the Romance, and in Greek. Isn't it most likely therefore
that *t, *d, *dh, and *n were also dental? (I'm less certain
about *l.)  

 

***

Patrick:

 

That is simply not true.

 

When I speak German, I must make a small effort to make my coronals and /l/ detntal rather than alveolar, as they are in English.

 

*** 

>   Therefore, speaking generally, I think coronal is more accurate.

Surely, when there's uncertainty about the exact position,
the inclusive term should be used, which is one matter,
but not a matter really effecting choice of upper or lower
articulator in describing phones. We could, for example,
use Catford's 'dentalveolar' instead of 'coronal', which
covers both dental and alveolar positions. 

 

***

Patrick:

 

'dento-alveolar' would certainly suit me better than 'dental'; but why use two words to describe one phenomenon: the front part of the tongue touching?

 

***

So I still wonder why you ask if it isn't "better" to use
such lower-articulator terms as 'coronal' and 'dorsal' in
preference to 'dentalveolar' and 'velar'. 

>   You say that Sihler, who is certainly no slouch, does not use
> velar as so many do - but dorsal. Is his usage such a bad example?

Well, all else the same, I don't suppose it matters whether
the upper articulator involved, or the lower, is chosen to
refer to a phone, although in either case it's still often
necessary to note both articulators, such as when speaking
of the retroflexes (apico-alveolar).

***

Patrick:

 

I used to use 'apical' but the late Larry Trask took me to task (or was it trask?) and persuaded me, from the standpoint of a phonetician, that 'coronal' was preferable to 'apical' since not all coronals are produced with the tip of tongue; some are produced with the forward blade of the tongue - in English, for example.

 

***

 

However, you do acknowledge, do you not, that 'dorsal' alone
could never serve the discussion of P.I.E., which had three
distinct dorsal series? As I said, it would be necessary to
use such terms as 'antero-dorsal', which are longer and less
familiar than the traditional terminology, and so all else
is not quite the same.

***

Patrick:

 

I basically agree with you here but I am surprised that you would acknowledge three articulatory positions for PIE -- as I do -- palatal (with /e/), alveolar (with /a/) and velar (with /o/).

 

However, ther are things one might want to say about all three articulatory positions for which 'dorsal; would be better used than the commonly employed 'velar'.

 

***