From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Oct 01 10:38:46 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: Lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 1 Oct 2002 17:38:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 60483 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2002 17:38:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Oct 2002 17:38:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-15.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.115) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Oct 2002 17:38:45 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-69-111.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.69.111]) by mailbox-15.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F0920B12 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 19:38:42 +0200 (DST) To: "Lojban" Subject: RE: [lojban] gizmu Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 18:40:20 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <001001c26970$fc618ba0$8beef8c1@ftiq2awxk6> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Lionel: > And: > > Out of curiosity, I wonder to what extent Lojbanists anglicize > > the pronunciation of Lojban words when used in English. > > For example, I unconsciously anglicize _gismu_ to /gizmu/. > > (I have other strange mispronunciations too, but they are > >not obvious anglicizations.) [e.g. I *say* /luZvo/ but *hear in my mind's ear* /luvo/. I also say /rafci/ = /rafSi/. Lord knows why.] > What you describe with {gismu} is not restricted to anglicization > but is a general phonetic behaviour, present in numerous natlangs. > It is called in phonetic linguistic 'partial assimilation' > (I hope I translated well this technical term :-): > whenever a unvoiced consonnant is followed by a voiced one > or vice-versa the natural tendency of phonetic organs is to simplify > the necessary vibrato triggering or stopping of the vocal chords, and > to let the second consonnant to partially assimilate the first, that is > the first one changes its voiced or unvoiced character but keeps > its articulation. > For instance in french: {anecdote} ('c' is voiced in 'g') > or {obtenir} ('b' is unvoiced in 'p') > > I see no reason why lojban will be spared this natural tendency. > In french, even if it is usually seen as bad accent to do it, and people > do try to avoid it in formal speech, it always shows in current usage: > human laziness is always the winner :-) Assimilation is natural, yet language-particular. Contrast russian _glasnost_ /glasnost/ with English /glaznost/. Also contrast English _prism_ /prizm/, prison /prizn/ with _listen_, /lisn/. I don't know what will happen with Lojban pronunciation. If most people were bufferers, then I think that phonetic distortions would be few, but I suspect that for nonbufferers -- i.e. almost everybody, even me when I forget to be a bufferer -- there is a lost of phonetic distortion. ---And.