Re: [tied] Re: PIE voiceless aspirates

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE voiceless aspirates


> On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 21:16:06 +0000, david_russell_watson
> <liberty@...> wrote:
>
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Are you really sure. German Karpfen is /karp-fN/, is it not?
> >> And is <pf> not an affricate?
> >> And where did you get the definition of 'affricate' above?
> >
> >Well here is where some confusion surely came in, and on second
> >thought there may well be some precedent of some sort of which
> >I'm unaware for referring to "affricate sequences". However my
> >point was not really that /tš/ in "treat shopper" can't be an
> >affricate, but that it can't be a unit phoneme, having as it does
> >a syllable boundary between its elements.
> >
> >As far as 'Karpfen' goes, I'm not entirely sure. I read at one
> >point long ago that it was an affricate, and so ever after on
> >the rare occasions that I have spoken German have divided such
> >words as [kar.pfN]. If it truly is divided as [karp.fN]
>
> It isn't. /pf/ is a labial affricate, and the syllable
> division is /kar.pfM/. Perhaps German hyphenation rules
> require the word to be split as karp-fen (I wouldn't know),
> but that has nothing to do with syllabification.

***
Patrick:

You are absolutely right — again. I looked too quickly at Curmé. It is
hyphenation rather than syllable division.

***


>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...