Re: [Nostratic-L] Re: incompetence yourself

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:51:38 +0000, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>the initial sequence /tr/
>> (<tree>), which, at least in RP, is realized as a completely
>voiceless
>> alveolar affricate [ts.], where [s.] is of course an allophone
>of /r/.
>
>Must be some new variety of RP, or a very unfortunate choice of
>symbol.
>
>Using extended SAMPA <http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/ipasam-
>x.pdf>, Daniel Jones writes something like [t`r] (retroflex plosive,
>but I can't remember the nature of the /r/). J.D. O'Connor gives
>[t_-r\] (post-alveolar plosive plus frictionless continuant), which
>is my _careful_ pronunciation. [t_-r\_r_0] (plosive plus a
>voiceless post-alveolar fricative) _occasionally_ occurs in my
>speech. Perhaps this what you mean by [ts.]?

Yes. More specifically the variant with a voiceless post-alveolar
fricative. It's not <ch> ([tS]) as in "cheese", nor is it Polish <trz> (I
can't write that in IPA: it's either [ts^] or [c^s^]).

>My usual
>pronunciation is [t_Sr\] (affricate plus rhotic). (I've confirmed
>this with a speech synthesiser - basically (<t> for <ch>) + <sh> +
><r>.) Similarly, inital <dr> is realised either with a gingival
>plosive plus a rhotic or as [dZr\]. I have heard the latter reduced
>[dZ], i.e. 'drinks' sounding exactly like 'jinks'.

Especially, I suppose, when they'd had a few too many...

>Incidentally, how can the IPA chart claim that 'r\_r = voiced
>alveolar fricative'? Surely z = voiced alveolar fricative?

Must be an old IPA chart. I remember them. The newer ones (as of 1989 at
least) have it as a (dental)/alveolar/postalveolar approximant.

>I would reply to PhoNet, but Miguel isn't a member.

If this comes through, I am now.

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