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

From: "Newton, Philip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:10:29 +0100

Adam Raizen wrote:
[on [h] and [x]]
> I'm pretty sure that German also contains both, though I don't 
> know whether it contrasts them.

(Using |x| to represent orthographical "x", /x/ for phonemic "x", and [x]
for phonetic "x".)

It does indeed contain all of [h] and [x] and [C] (i.e. [ç], IPA c-cedilla).
(I'm not sure whether there are minimal pairs for [x] vs [C] since their use
is nearly exclusively determined by the surroundings except for the
diminutive ending -chen, which alway has [C].)

However, I'm not sure whether [h], [x], and [C] contrast, since [x] and [C]
tend to be syllable-final and [h] tends to be syllable-initial (or medial).
Also, |h| is used for sounds other than [h], especially vowel lengthening,
and tends to turn into a glide intervocalically. So |Sachen| ("things") vs
|sahen| ("(they) saw") is [zaxn=] vs [za:@n]; the second word does not (I
claim) contain [h]. Also, |Ehe| ("marriage") is probably more often [e:@]
rather than [e:h@].

|Küche| vs |Kühe| is a distinction in spelling, but again, I'd imagine it's
[ky:C@] vs [ky:@], with no [h] in the latter. I can imagine there are
dialects which pronounce intervocalic /h/ as [h], though.

Um, in summary, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a minimal pair between
any two of [h] [x] [C] in (my idiolect of) German. (The closest I can come
up with between [x] and [C] is |fauchen| "to hiss" [fauxn=] vs |Frauchen|
"female master (of a dog or similar pet)" [frauC@n], FWIW.)

(Oh, and on a related note, I think I also pronounce /ihi/ as something
approaching [iCi].)

mu'omi'e filip.
[email copies appreciated, since I read the digest]
{ko fukpi mrilu fi mi ki'u le du'u mi te mrilu le notseljmaji}
-- 
filip.niutyn. <[email-masked]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.