tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 23 20:58:12 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: the nature of pIqaD



ja' HomDoq:
>ghItlhmeH pat *phonemic* lo'lu'taHvIS, wa' *phoneme* Del Hoch *symbol*,
>'e' DaQubchugh, bIlughbe'.
>ghItlhmeH pat *phonemic* lo'lu'taHvIS, wa' *phoneme* <tlhegh> Del
>Hoch *symbol*.

jImIS.  <tlhegh> Dalo', 'ach meq vIyajbe'.
chay' "phoneme" Delbe' "phonemic" pat?  qatlh lughbe' "phonetic"?
jatlh mu'ghomwIj:
  pho-ne-tic:
  1. Of or relating to phonetics.
  2. Representing the sounds of speech with a set of distinct symbols,
     each designating a single sound.
qechwIj Delbej mu'meyvam.

>cha' *sound* Delchugh wa' *phoneme*, *sound*vaD *allophone* luponglu'.

maj, 'ach QIch Delchugh pat, "phonetic" pat 'oH 'e' vIHar.  mu'ghom yIyu'.

>ghItlhmeH pat *phonetic* lo'lu'taHvIS, wa' *allophone* <tlhegh> Del
>Hoch *symbol*.
>ghItlhmeH pat *phonetic* lutu'be'lu', 'e' vIQub.

vaj nuq 'oH "syllabary"?

>> So I still think that the sketchy description of pIqaD that appears
>> in TKD is more consistent with a way to describe pronunciation than
>vaj, *phonemic*law' ghItlhmeH pat pIqaD.

Qo'!  QIch Dellaw' pIqaD vaj "phonetic" pat 'oHlaw'!  chay' jIlughbe'?

-- ghunchu'wI'




Back to archive top level