Re: Monophthongs in IPA

Dhammanando,

Sorry for the obscurity.  The point is: many languages have vowel
systems with [a, i, u] but not [inverted v, I, upsilon].  Few (if any)
have vowel systems with the vowels [inverted v, I, upsilon], but not
[a, i, u].  Thus the 'short' vowels are marked with respect to the
'long' vowels.  Meaning that if you have marked vowels, you expect to
have the corresponding unmarked vowels also. 

George


--- Dhammanando Bhikkhu <dhammanando@...> wrote:

> Dear George,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> >> I am thinking of something like this:
> >>
> >> a-va.n.na:     [inverted v], [inverted v:]
> >> i-va.n.na:     [I], [I:]
> >> u-va.n.na:     [upsilon], [upsilon:]
> >>
> >> or:
> >>
> >> a-va.n.na:     [script a], [script a:]
> >> i-va.n.na:     [i], [i:]
> >> u-va.n.na:     [u], [u:]
> >>
> >> Or perhaps some blend of the two. If this is implausible,
> >> then what exactly is the negative evidence that counts
> >> against it ?
> >
> > I think the second proposal is more plausible because if there are
> no
> > quality differences of the English sort, then the more extreme
> > qualities ([a, i, u]) are less marked.
>
> Forgive my obtuseness, but I don't understand what you are
> saying here. Less marked than what ? And how does this make
> the second scheme the more plausible ?
>
> Best wishes,
> Dhammanando
>

*   *   *   *   *
George Bedell
120/2 Palm Springs Place
Mahidol Road, Chiang Mai 50000
THAILAND
+66 (0)53-241342
correspondence in Japanese may be addressed to
      gbedelljp@...

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com