Subject: Re: [h] (was: RE: Re: Aesthetics

From: Nick Nicholas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 02:46:30 +1100

> As for the [ihi] that you and
> Lojbab report yourselves saying, well -- maybe I can listen when we
> meet... It's not that I'm convinced that I'm right and you're wrong,
> but [ihi] seems so incredibly difficult to articulate; I say [ic,i],
> or else [i i_ i] (where i_ is breathy voiced).

And, come come. Surely they're pronouncing it with a voiced h (h<?> in 
Kirshenbaum IPA, hooktop-h); and surely a voiced h should be a licit 
allophone of the prescribed voiceless h. [ihi] is indeed hard; but not 
only is [ih<?>i] not hard, it's what English speakers do naturally (and 
Hindi speakers too, I've found; I had no hesitation in making that 
voiced intervocalic h the Hindi rendering of ' .)

In fact, since the prescription is merely for a vowel hiatus barrier, 
I'd be much happier with voiced h than lateral fricatives or alveolar 
clicks or whatever else Craig currently chooses. :-)

What's this? John pronounces it as [iCi]? Well, there are Germans in 
his kin. But John, you say you turn off voicing; why do you need to? I 
know the prescription says 'unvoiced fricative', but why need it be 
unvoiced? And would you claim h<?> is an illegitimate rendering of ' ? 
After all, you claim h in "Aha" as the definition of ' --- and that h 
is usually voiced, I'd have thought.

###
ki egeire arga ta sthqia ta qlimmena;#Nick Nicholas, French/Italian
san ahdoni pou se nuxtia anoijiata # University of Melbourne
thn wra pou kelahda epnixth, wimena! # [email-masked]
stis murwdies kai st' anqismena bata.# http://www.opoudjis.net
-- N. Kazantzakhs, Tertsines: Xristos#