From cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN Sat Feb 15 01:28:47 1992 Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Sat, 15 Feb 92 01:28 EST Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA21218; Sat, 15 Feb 92 00:41:19 EST Received: from cunixf.cc.columbia.edu by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA06262; Sat, 15 Feb 92 00:03:33 -0500 Received: from cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu by cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (5.59/FCB) id AA12763; Sat, 15 Feb 92 00:03:28 EST Message-Id: <9202150503.AA12763@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1) with BSMTP id 0192; Sat, 15 Feb 92 00:01:52 EST Received: by CUVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 3157; Sat, 15 Feb 92 00:00:43 EST Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 23:51:40 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: response to and on phonology X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann Status: RO And writes: >I don't believe you. You're predicting that you wouldn't understand >either (a) or (b) below. I'm predicting we'd all have much more trouble >with (b). > >(a) She went to hear Mozart's Magic [flyt]. (flute) >(b) She believes the Earth is [flyt]. (flat) Only because I know of "Magic Flute" as a unit, and would thus presume and internally correct the error. If you chose a lesser known work wherein the word would not be predictable from the surroundings, I would have trouble with (a) as well. I indeed don't consider [y] to be a non-sound in English. It is obviously somewhat vocalic in nature in the uses you describe, but it is not an IDENTIFIABLE English sound. In English the rule is - if you hear a non-identifiable vowel, you attempt (not always successfully as you note with (b)) to map it to some actual English vowel because we presume that the speaker is speaking English non-nonsense. In Lojban, the mapping rule is that if you cannot trivially map a vowel sound to a regular phomene, presume it to be a non-phoneme, with the added guideline that if a speaker regularly uses the same non-Lojban vowel sound between consonant clusters, then you can adjust your filtering process for that speaker to assume that the sound is a trained insert of species 'buffer'. To the extent that you then notice this, you are being an informed listener. I am trying to have people be informed about how they and others speak - part of my crusade for better linguistic awareness and education. Identifying that cluster buffering occurs, and that, while it is different from the norm, and not wholly 'correct', it solves a real problem for some speakers and is 'acceptable'. Cowan points out to me that many English speakers cannot truly end a word with a stop on a voiced consonant (d and ng are noteworthy examples), and may add a buffer afterwards. This happens in many, maybe most but not all, people's speech. But I question that English is defined by any formal system as always ending in a vowel which is sometimes elided. lojbab