Re: Re[5]: [tied] Re: Finnish KASKI

My mistake.

In this word the phone [v\] is normally used.

Transcribing it phonemically as /v/ did not really tell us much, did it?


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
To: "Patrick Ryan" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 1:56 PM
Subject: Re[5]: [tied] Re: Finnish KASKI


> At 2:05:58 PM on Friday, March 28, 2008, Patrick Ryan wrote:
>
> > From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
>
> >> At 5:48:44 AM on Friday, March 28, 2008, Patrick Ryan wrote:
>
> >>> From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
>
> >>>> From: Patrick Ryan
>
> >>>>>> 1) English - English schoolboy German e.g that <->
> >>>>>> das, two <-> <zwei> /sfai/.
>
> >>>>> Only if they had an incompetent teacher. It is /tsWai/.
>
> >>>> I've been taught /tsvaj/
>
> >>> You have been taught wrong.
>
> >> /tsvaj/ is correct; <w> here is /v/, which is realized
> >> either as [v] or as the corresponding approximant, IPA
> >> script-v, X-SAMPA [v\].
>
> > More fuzzy thinking, Brian.
>
> > How can /tsvaj/ be "correct" if it can be realized in two
> > different ways?
>
> Because it's a *phonemic* representation: that's what the
> slants mean. Your objection would hold water only if Arnaud
> had written '[tsvaj]', with square brackets. (This isn't
> the first time that you've confused phones and phonemes.)
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
>