tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Mar 09 16:02:27 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: {oy}, diphthong or V+C


>ja' Sangqar:
> >There is a parallel situation with the letter "l" in Brazilian 
>Portuguese.
> >Syllable-final versions create a diphthong: "final" is pronounced as 
>/finaU/
> >(excuse lack of IPA), for example.  The letter "l" is obviously a 
>consonant
> >orthographically, but the final sound in that word is definitely a
> >diphthong.
>
>Thank you.  I now believe understand what you mean when you talk about
>diphthongs.  Even though you didn't directly answer my question about
>"level" etc., it seems that you think the last sound in such words is a
>diphthong.
>
>I disagree -- for the simple reason that the "dark l" at the end of "level"
>is *defined* as a consonantal sound.

Actually, for me the last syllable in those sounds is a schwa followed by an 
"l", although the second "l" is pronounced differently than the first "l".  
Similarly, for me words ending in "-tion" have a schwa followed by an "n", 
although I noticed that at this page: 
http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/ipachart.html, they transcribe it as an "n" 
directly following the big skinny "S" they use for "sh".  So there's 
definitely a consonant there, as opposed to the situation in Portuguese, 
which situation I intended as similar to Klingon {oy}, as opposed to similar 
to English "el/al".

> >>For our purposes, phonetics and orthography are the same thing.  While
> >>there are allophonic variations between syllable-initial and 
>syllable-final
> >>pronunciations of certain consonants, the writing system we use is 
>intended
> >>as a strict representation of the sounds of the language.
> >
> >If you're talking about allophones, then you're talking about phonemics 
>and
> >not phonetics.
>
>I'm not "talking about" allophones.  I merely mentioned them in passing, as
>a caveat to the direct mapping between spoken sound written symbol.  I'm
>acknowledging that there are sounds in Klingon, like {y} and {r} and {l},
>which aren't always pronounced identically at the start and end of
>syllables.
>
> >For those who don't know, the sound made by "y" in the English word "yes" 
>is
> >generally transcribed "j"., and the sound of "oy" in "boy" is "oI", with 
>the
> >"I" often superscripted.  So in Klingon the phones [j] and diphthongizing
> >[I] are both allophones of the phoneme /j/.
>
>Either you're using a transcription system that I don't recognize, or your
>pronunciation of the word "boy" is very unlike mine.  I don't put a short
>"I" sound in it anywhere, which is the sound I associate with a capital /I/
>in IPA (incidentally, the IPA symbol is the reason for Klingon {I} to be
>uppercase).

If I had access to a word processor, I would transcribe a diphthong as 
either a "j" or an "I", superscripted (like a mathematical exponent) after 
the main vowel (in the case of u-diphthongs, I would use a "w" or a "U" 
instead. (I'm using ASCII I and U in place of similar IPA symbols.)  
However, I did notice that the page mentioned above does not superscript 
them (an example right on the top of the page is the diphthong /eI/ 
representing the last "a" in "association"), and I can't superscript in this 
post, anyway.

>To keep this on topic for *Klingon* pronunciation, I don't pronounce
>English "boy" and Klingon {Hoy} to rhyme with each other.  "Toy" has a
>single "oy" diphthong.  {Hoy} has {o} followed by a {y}, as two distinct
>sounds.  There is some definite blending between them, as the mouth moves
>from one position to another without a break in producing sound, but it's
>just a transitional step between the two sounds.

Aha!  I do not.  I pronounce them both as diphthongs, although the Klingon 
diphthong is somewhat tighter than the corresponding American English one.  
I base the use of diphthongs on TKD 1.2 (p. 16-17 in the English edition)..  
Not only does he explicitly state that Klingon {oy} rhymes with English 
"toy", he says that {ow} and {uw} are inpossible combinations, the {w} 
getting swallowed up in the preceding vowel (note: not MO's wording).  I 
fail to see how they would do that if {w} did not cause diphthongs when 
behind a vowel, and if {w}, then presumably also {y}.

> >To sum up my position: the combination {oy} (in the same syllable) is
> >orthographically (and most likely phonemically) a vowel followed by a
> >consonant, but phonetically, it is almost certainly a diphthong.
>
>Maybe your knowledge of what "oy" does in other languages is getting in
>your way.  When I'm in full-Klingon-speaking mode, *I* pronounce it as a
>vowel followed by a consonant.

My first contribution to this thread was a question asking whether anyone 
actually pronounced them separately, and also how MO pronounces them.  Even 
if we assume that the movies, TV shows, and the Power Klingon audio tape are 
flawed examples of pronunciation, MO's pronunciation at least should be 
considered canon.  So I think Conversational Klingon should be the basis for 
our proununciation.  This recording has the benefit of being speech intended 
to model pronunciation, as opposed to relaxed speech.  Perhaps some with a 
copy of CK can tell us whether he says /oj/ or /oI/ for {oy}.

>-- ghunchu'wI'

Sangqar


_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Back to archive top level