From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Thu Nov 16 22:45:00 1995 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id WAA13609 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:44:58 -0500 Message-Id: <199511170344.WAA13609@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 06C0AC37 ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:37:59 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 22:35:13 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: Goran on phonology To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu Status: OR Goran & And: > > There is nothing in lojban phonology that would imply that aspiration > > has distinctive function. > True, but I'm not sure that that's what was originally intended. I suspect > James Brown, or whoever it was, believed that English p/t/k b/d/g differ > in voicing. Was this design feature really introduced in the knowledge > that it is foreign and very difficult to english ears? I doubt it. Spanish distinguishes them by fricating (or whatever) b/d/g rather than by aspirating p/t/k. If voicedness is not enough I don't see why the English method should be the preferred one. :) Jorge