Re[2]: [tied] Re: [pieml] Labiovelars versus Palatals + Labiovelar A

At 8:33:46 AM on Sunday, November 2, 2008, Arnaud Fournet wrote:

> From: "bmscotttg" <BMScott@...>

[...]

>> (By the way, every serious linguistic description of
>> French that I've read gives French three glide phonemes,
>> /w/, /j/, and /turned-h/.)

> What kind of serious linguistic descriptions ?

The usual: outlines of phonology, morphology, and syntax,
often with a section on historical sources of the lexicon.

[...]

>>>> Not at all: I'm explaining why I think that you're
>>>> wrong. (I don't play that kind of game, and I don't
>>>> appreciate the suggestion that I would.) I agree with
>>>> Rick: you're being misled by the orthography.

>>> I was expecting this from you, so I'm not surprised.

>> Watch it: that kind of insult is altogether unnecessary.

> I can't see why my negative expectations (that were
> actually fulfilled) are insults.

(1) They weren't fulfilled.
(2) You are accusing me of deliberate dishonesty.

[...]

> A minimal pair made up of variants of the same word :
> Message 61150
>> In fact the consonantalization of the initial of <oui>
>> was already accepted by the 16th century grammarians,
>> though fluctuations between /wi/ and /ui/ continued into
>> modern French (Pope, §241).

> To the beginner :
> A minimal pair must be made up of two different words.
> <oui> /ui/ being [wi] or [ui] does not prove /w/ exists.

<sigh> Obviously I should have written more. You
completely missed the point: that was not offered as a
minimal pair. The relevant part of the sentence is the
first part; the second was included in the interests of
honesty, as it somewhat weakens the force of the first part.
Pope's §241 in full shows that an analysis of French that
distinguishes /u/ and /w/ has been possible at least since
the 16th century.

>> It may be that French can be given a satisfactory
>> phonemic analysis in which /u/ has allophones [u] and
>> [w]; I *have* seen such an analysis of Italian. But the
>> analyses of French that I've seen use two phonemes, a
>> vowel and a glide. And if there are competing analyses,
>> I tend to prefer those that are closer to the surface
>> realizations.

> If you are dealing with a superficial phonetic level,

I'm not. Learn to read: I made it entirely clear earlier in
the post that I was talking about phoneMic analyses.

> Don't speak about phonemes, speak about sounds.

Do you know the expression 'teach your grandmother to suck
eggs'? I believe that the French counterpart is 'apprendre
à un vieux singe à faire la grimace'.

Brian