Re: Re[2]: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]

----- Original Message -----
From: "glen gordon" <glengordon01@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]


>
> Argumentative Patrick:
> > Perhaps I have not really listened.
>
> Not likely.
>
>
> > Do you have a reference from a phonetician
> > supporting your superior listening abilities?
>
> Brian is backed up by a Canadian called gLeN. It's
> true that Canadians often do not aspirate final
> stops... hence they are "pre-glottalized". These
> stops are written in IPA as a stop followed by a
> symbol looking like a superscript "corner". In
> Newfoundland English, "what" is often pronounced
> "wha", especially when used as "eh" at the end of
> sentences like "'E's been drinkin' again, wha?" :)
>
> The "holding on" of final stops also occurs in
> Cantonese and Danish, which in fact was explained
> by the Danish professor in my university when I
> took an Intro to IPA course as filler.
>
> Funny how Patrick always knows better than...
> everybody.
>
>
> = gLeN

***
Patrick:

I have the subjective impression that final [t] is not glottalized nor
pre-glottalized in American English. Brian believes that it is. Rob thinks
that he can simultaneously pronounce [?] and [t], which I believe is
physically impossible.

What Glen believes or does not believe is only another subjective
impression.

If Brian is correct, then a phonetician has measured and noticed this
phenomenon. Rather than bandy subjective impressions around, why do we not
get accurate objective information? My call for references to support
Brian's impression has met with a resounding silence. Does that tell us
anything?

Glen's statement that lack of final aspiration entails pre-glottalization is
a non- sequitur. Aspiration and glottalization have no necessary connection.
Initial [d] is neither aspirated nor (pre-)glottalized in American English.

I think it is obvious to _almost_ everyone that the specimen of Newfoundland
English cited above is a Briticizing.

Finally, we were discussing American English not Canadian English.


***