tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 18 16:44:52 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Phonology once again (was: Re: qaSovlu' jineH)
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: Phonology once again (was: Re: qaSovlu' jineH)
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 18:47:26 -0500
macheq writes:
>You would like to believe it that {'} isn't any more special than {p} or {k}
>but from the phonological point of view this assumption is but a myth.
>Well, a letter {'} is a letter like {p} or {k}, but not the sound like
>the other two.
I certainly hear it (and speak it) as a sound like the others.
>First it is described in TKD as "a glottal stop". But in fact it appers
>to have double function: one in the beginning of a syllable and another
>in the end.
I understand {'} to have exactly the same function as {p} does, but with
the air cut off in the throat rather than between the lips.
>The first one is very easy to explain. It is exactly what is called
>"hiatus". Maybe you understand something else by this, but that's what I
>have learned about it - hiatus is a glottal stop.
>It's the kind of rapid closing and opening of the vocal cords without
>making them vibrate.
>I could describe it also as a slight, voiceless cough sound.
I think you're using a strange definition of "hiatus" here. A stop at the
beginning of a syllable doesn't fit my understanding of hiatus at all, nor
does a stop at the end of a syllable. The linguistic definition of hiatus
places it between two vowels, and doesn't call it a stop of any sort. Do
you actually put a glottal stop between the "e" and "a" in "reality"? If
I had to spell the sound I put there, it would be a very weak "h".
>Maybe in English you use it less strong than we do in Polish
>(so when I pronounce English words that start with a vowell beginning
>them with a strong {'-} - it might be considered a Polonism) but nevertheless
>I can hear Anglophones pronouncing it. Not being a native speaker of English
>I must rely on the authority of Marc Okrand:
><<The apostrophe indicates a sound which is
>frequently uttered, but not written in English. It is a glottal stop,
>the slight catch in the throat between the two syllables of "uh-oh" or
>"unh-unh" meaning "no".>> TKD p. 16.
Perhaps you haven't heard the "middle American" pronunciation of "uh-oh".
>The ancient Greeks have distinguished two kinds of it, one (less heard)
>being called (in Latin, :-) ): "spiritus lenis" and marked with a {'},
>the other one maybe corresponding more closely to what we describe above
>- called "spiritus asper" and marked with a {`} transliterated by the Romans
>as {h}. It was exactly a kind of a glottal stop.
The "h" sound you mention sounds like a glottal fricative, not a stop.
>It was used not only at the beginning of a vowel-starting word, but
>also on a beginning {r} (thence Latin {Rh}) and between two intervocalic
>r's {er`ryptos}.
>This "stop" stops vowel and semivowel (Greek {r} might be one of them}
>pronounciation and disables a "smooth" passage from one vowel to another
>- demands a break (hiatus).
>The second function is described in TKD: <<When Klingon {'} comes at the
>end of a word, the vowel preceding the {'} is often repeated in a very soft
>whisper, as if an echo.>>
>Well, this reminds exactly the Sanskrit sound called "visarga" [letting-out]
>and written as {:} in devanagari script, transliterated as an {h} with a dot
>below. It also cause an echo of the vowel.
>
>Now tell me which other Klingon consonant has a similar effect on the
>preceeding vowel?
{p} and {t} do it when I'm speaking forcefully. {q} does it as much as
{'} does. Try saying "pop" or "pup" or "pip" and listen to the whispered
echo of the vowel sound that escapes after the final "p" is released. At
least that's what I hear when *I* say them.
>In Conversational Klingon it is described differently as:
>"abrupt cutting off the sound"
>and you can hear contrasted syllables with and without an {-'}.
That "abrupt cutting off" is true of any stop. Contrast {Ho} with {Hot}.
>The {-'} has an evident effect on the length of the vowel.
I don't hear an effect on the length of the vowel itself, merely an
effect on the quickness of its end. {tI'} can be stretched out as
long as you want before you speak the {'}.
>Which other consonant has a similar effect?
Most, if not all, of them.
>It is unimportant whether you pronounce
>"maj" with a long {a} or with a short {a} (speaking of the
>metrical length} even if it seems that they are pronounced longer - you can
>hear them long when the words are pronounced alone by themselves, but in
>sentences they become neutral-length.
Okay...
>With the exception of {I} which is described
>as being able of having at least one more different way of pronounciation
>"not yet known exactly under what circumstances" (TKD p. 16), the vowels
>have for sure two pronounciations: one before a consonant or in an open
>syllable (when it is neutral - long or short) and another before
>the glottal stop {-'} - when it is "abruptly short".
Sorry, I don't hear this distinction in vowel pronunciation.
>It {-'} also causes the syllable containing it to be stressed rather than
>any other syllable not containg an {-'} in a word. (TKD p.17)
>
>Is this not sufficient to consider {'} a special sound?
That's a good point, but I'm not willing to conclude that there's something
about {'} that *makes* it special. So far as I know, it's merely a rule
(like the one that says you can't use {-be'} on a verb with an imperative
prefix).
>To analyse fully the ture nature of {'} you must take into consideration
>how {''} is pronounced. Is it a germinated consonant, like say {ll}?
Sorry, I don't understand this use of the word "germinated". But I would
pronounce {''} in a way analogous to my pronunciation of {bb} -- I keep the
stop active for a while between closing off the air and opening it again.
It results in a moment of silence between syllables. Sometimes, if I have
the urge to make the pronunciation really obvious, I use sort of an anti-
hiatus -- I almost voice a short "uh" between them.
>or is the function of the 1st {'} a bit different from theat of the second
>{'}? Compare the pronounciation of {cha'a'} "big torpedoes" and
>{cha''a'} "does he show?" or more precisely: how is the syllable-
>beginning {'} pronounced after a vowel? You have certainly more experience
>than I do, so am I right that hiatus in both cases is similar?
I pronounce {'} after a vowel just like I do any other time. The "blend"
between a vowel or glide and {'} is slightly different from between a stop
and {'}, of course.
>As concerns its influence of pronounciation of vowels in some other syllables:
>I am absolutely positive there is no vowel heard between {t} and {r}
>in {tera'ngan} on the cassette. After having read your comment I have
>listened to the k7 three times. I can hear only {tr}.
>
>QoyghachlIj bIHbejbe' QoyghachwIj'e'.
teSDu'lIj bIHbe'bej teSDu'wIj'e'!
><I couldn't find a word for "ear">
{teS} is the organ of hearing. {qogh} is the external part.
>Of course this is not English {tr}. First we have here a rolled {r}, like
>in Polish (not flapped like in English). Second, the {t} seems to me
>more dental than English alveolar {t}, so again it's more similar to
>Polish than English (but here I may be wrong)
I had read your "tr" as meaning the blend as in "treat". It appears you
agree that the "t" and "r" are separately pronounced.
>(Although what I hear seems to be contrary to TKD which says that {t}
>is more similar to the English one. What exactly is :<the tongue touches
>a position on the roof of the mouth farther forward than that for {D}>
>(TKD p. 15)? Seems a description of an apico-aleolar or alveolar sound
>rather that that of a dental one (as contrasted with cerebral-retroflex
>{D} and {S}).
I guess I used the term "dental" in my other note incorrectly.
>Finally, what I hear on the k7 is exactly what I hear or pronounce when
>Polish "tramwaj" is spoken, rather than English "tram". No vowel between
>{t} and {r}. and exactly the same slight "hesitation" of the tongue when
>changing from a stop {t} to a rolled {r}.
>If you argue that there is a slight pause between, I'd say
>it is rather prononunced {t'r} than {ter} (see above the description of
>{r`r} in Greek.
I dunno. I hear a (very short) {e} sound when *I* say {tera'ngan}, and I
think I'm saying it the same way I hear it pronounced on the tape.
>The syllable {te} contains a neutral-length, unstressed vowel.
>The next syllable {ra'} contains an abruptly short, stressed vowel.
>The first of the two tends to disapper. It might be either a special
>way of pronouncing the word {tera'ngan}, not even necessarily {tera'},
>or a more general tendency. Both seem plausible. Who knows? Maybe MO?
Based on the way I hear vowels disappearing in everyday speech, I think
it is a general tendency on the part of *people* to do this, not just a
feature of Klingon pronunciation.
>Let us take another example. In French in some words the short unstressed
>{e} tends to disappear in daily speech before a syllable containing
>a stressed vowel. "Petit" may be pronounced [peti] with a short [e]
>{scheva}, or more often [pti]. Some people pronounce it in
>between as [p'ti].
>
>I can only see a parallel to my last example in {tera'ngan}.
Here we agree.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj