Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tHc4Q-0000ZUC; Mon, 20 Nov 95 21:40 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D483A821 ; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 20:40:02 +0100 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 18:56:43 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Goran on aspiration X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1299 Lines: 32 > I don't understand you, people... It seems that my ideas on English are > a bit skewed... I believed that English aspirates a voiceless plosive if > and only if it is the first consonant in the word and is followed by a > vowel. I don't know whether it also happens to the voiced plosives, I > think not. So if I am right, it doesn't have any distinctive function, > and replaces its unaspirated pair only in one special case: > kill [k'ill] vs. gill [gill], > but: > leak [li:k] vs. league [li:g], > plot [plot] vs. blot [blot], > staple [steipl] vs. stable [steibl] > (apostrophe here signifying aspiration). paupei? Not exactly. You get these: [kh]ill "kill" vs [k]ill "gill" [pL]ot "plot" vs [pl]ot "blot" (where L is voiceless lat fric) As for leak/league and staple/stable, the difference is signalled partly by shortening of the vowel before /p/, and partly by whisper, in that for /b/ the glottis narrows without vibrating. /b/s can be fully voiced, but often aren't. In a sense, the "true" distinction is not voiced v. voiceless but wide v. narrow glottis; voicing is one realization of narrow glottis, as is whisper, while aspiration (= relatively late voice onset time) is an effect of wide glottis. Vowel shortening is probably a consequence of narrow glottis too. --- And