Peter T. Daniels scripsit:

> > I didn't say that *Gleason* could analyze them as /zj/.
> You appended that as a comment to Gleason's discussion.

I appended it as a comment to your posting of G's discussion.
I supposed that you were citing it as independent evidence, not
merely as an indication of Gleason's views.

> You've never done a phonemic analysis of a language?


> > > > I will bet there are dialects in which all three of these show /dZ/.
> > >
> > > We aren't describing a "dialect." We're describing General American, in
> > > particular as instantiated by Henry Allan Gleason, Jr.
> >
> > It is preposterous to claim that General American is not a dialect.
> "Dialects" in which those three words have /dZ/ are not General
> American.

It was you who introduced GA into the discussion. I was speaking of
English as a whole, and whether it is satisfactory to treat /Z/ as a
phoneme in it.

> > The notion that "rouge" is underlyingly /ruzj/ is
> > absurd.
> Obviously.

The notion that "vision" is underlyingly /vIzj@.../ is far less absurd.

From another posting:

> Why do you speak in the past? He hasn't died without telling me, has he?

Perhaps suzmccarth had him confused, as I initially had, with the far
more famous Henry Allan Gleason (1882-1975). I suppose they are
father and son, though I can find no specific confirmation of this.

He made the Legislature meet at one-horse John Cowan
tank-towns out in the alfalfa belt, so that jcowan@...
hardly nobody could get there and most of
the leaders would stay home and let him go
to work and do things as he pleased. --Mencken, Declaration of Independence