From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Mon Dec 09 07:17:28 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 9 Dec 2002 15:17:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 61786 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 15:17:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Dec 2002 15:17:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 15:17:28 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18LPey-0007vj-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:17:28 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LPem-0007ug-00; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:17:16 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:17:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.114]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LPeX-0007rc-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:17:01 -0800 Received: from oemcomputer (host81-7-57-107.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.57.107]) by lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDC847F11 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:16:28 +0100 (MET) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: [h] (was: RE: Re: Aesthetics Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:16:17 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal X-archive-position: 3342 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin OT: Philip: 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) The phonemic status of the [x]:[C] contrast is a famous controversy, because only if morpheme boundaries are not present in phonological representations need they be distinct phonemes. I suspect (on the basis of ill-informed introspection) that the h vs. x/C contrast may be similar in that only if syllable structure is not present in phonological representations need they be distinct phonemes. --And.