Re: isochrony

--- In phoNet@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Paul G. POTET" <potetjp@w...>
wrote:

> Now the compound <morning sun> has its own stress pattern :

<morning> has

> the compound stress. So we have at two-tier system : each word has

its own

> stress pattern and the compound has it own "super" stress pattern.
>
> Generally English tends to favour trochaic feet, whichever the tier
> considered.
>
> The theory is far from being perfect. For instance <infinitely>,

as used in

> plain English, will fall into two trochaic feet,
> | "in °fi | 'nit °ly |, but, admitedly, | 'nit °ly | is not quite
> comparable to | '°sun | in "morning sun".

"Infinitely" is a problem for my phonological systems. In my speech:

a) Words consist of dactyls and trochees, plus initial
unaccented 'upbeats'. "Infinite" is a single, trochaic or spondaic
foot.

b) Native suffixes do not disturb the accentuation.

Four syllable feet are barely tolerated in my speech. I have two
solutions - syncopation, and splitting the word into two feet, with
the former being dominant. Syncopation is my preferred solution.
Thus while "infinite" may be /"Inf&n&t/ or /"Infn&t/, "infinitely"
is usually /"Infn&tli/ or, perhaps, /"Inf&_Xn&tli/ (I take it 'extra-
short' will do for svarabhakti vowels),
only occasionally /"Inf&%n&tli/ or /"Infi%n&tli/.

Richard.