------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/79vVAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 18 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. OT: Corriolis force
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Ventricular phonation
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: "David J. Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Advanced English to become official!
From: Damian Yerrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: Advanced English to become official!
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: Advanced English to become official!
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: Gender Bending Moro
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. YAEPT: OMFG I'm a mutant!!! (was Re: Advanced English to become
official!)
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:17:33 +0200
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: OT: Corriolis force
On Saturday 02 April 2005 17:29 MEST, Tim May wrote:
> Carsten Becker wrote at 2005-04-02 12:13:26 (+0200)
>
> Eh? The Coriolis force is a real phenomenon. (There's a
> sense in which it "doesn't exist", in that it's just a
> consequence of taking your measurements in a rotating
> frame, but that's irrelevant to the question of what it
> does to water going down a plughole.)
I have always hated Physics. OK, it depends on the frame of
course. On earth, it's real, but if viewed from outside,
it's not AFAIK. It's similar to the centrifugal/centripetal
forces.
> The fact is though, that over the size of a sink or
> toilet, the Coriolis force is too small to have more than
> a slight statistical effect over which way the water
> goes. You can easily make the water go the "wrong" way.
> It does account for the direction of rotation of
> hurricanes and other large weather systems, though.
Thank you for that clarification!
Carsten
--
Edatamanon le matahanarà benenoea eibenem ena Bahis
Tingraena, 15-A8-58-1-3-10-10 ena Curan Tertanyan.
» http://www.beckerscarsten.de/?conlang=ayeri
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:48:56 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
Steg Belsky wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2005, at 10:56 PM, Joseph Bridwell wrote:
>
>> Knowledge of NSEW for me is influenced by my decades as a Pagan -
>> mentally establising cardinal points from the sun etc. is nearly a
>> subconscious process for me when I visit any place (though Seattle
>> seems to have been the most problematic for me because of the many
>> grey cloud-covered days).
>
>
> How does that work? What's the reason for establishing cardinal
> points/direction?
Je ne suis pas Pagan, but IIRC from the handsfasting I attended, each
cardinal direction is associated with a different set of helper
spirits. The officiant (priest(ess)?) faces each direction as s/he
calls out for aid from the associated pantheon.
> The reason i'm asking is because, for comparison, i've also picked up
> ways to recognize cardinal directions (although i'm not quite at the
> 'nearly subconscious' point yet) for religious reasons, since as a
> traditionally observant Jew i need to pray 3 times a day in a specific
> direction (Jerusalemwards).
That would seem to be different, though. Facing Jerusalem (or Makkah
for Qibla) is not a simple matter of identifying compass points; you
have to identify the exact bearing of the path from your location to the
target city, which is not something you can really do subconsciously.
Especially not if you follow the Great Circle route . . . :)
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:56:53 EDT
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
In a message dated 4/2/2005 11:43:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>This issue -- gender in language and its relationship with sexual
>politics -- is one I've always wondered about, but I've never managed
>to find much cross-linguistic data about it. Or really any data at
>all; usually I just hear it asserted as a truism. Does anyone have
>any pointers to studies about this? Especially about, as Pascal
>mentioned, societies that are more female-dominant?
In his book _Gender_, Greville Corbett says that there is no clear
correlation between grammatical gender systems and sex roles in human societies.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:09:37 +0300
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
On Apr 3, 2005, at 6:48 PM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Steg Belsky wrote:
>> The reason i'm asking is because, for comparison, i've also picked up
>> ways to recognize cardinal directions (although i'm not quite at the
>> 'nearly subconscious' point yet) for religious reasons, since as a
>> traditionally observant Jew i need to pray 3 times a day in a specific
>> direction (Jerusalemwards).
> That would seem to be different, though. Facing Jerusalem (or Makkah
> for Qibla) is not a simple matter of identifying compass points; you
> have to identify the exact bearing of the path from your location to
> the
> target city, which is not something you can really do subconsciously.
> Especially not if you follow the Great Circle route . . . :)
> -Marcos
Well, it mostly is a matter of simply identifying compass points; since
-- at least in the Jewish version -- you don't really have to be exact
about it; most people and syangogues just worry about getting it
generally correct. It's only really an issue if you're in the vicinity
of Jerusalem that you have to worry about being more exact; once you
get farther away people generally think in a general NESW way. For
instance, i'm pretty sure that everyone in the Americas, from Alaska to
Tierra del Fuego, just faces "east".
I'm actually pretty lucky, since the street i live on in Jerusalem is
oriented pretty much exactly towards the Temple Mount, so when i'm at
home i just need to face 'up the street'wards ;) .
-Stephen (Steg)
"...i gave you love / you gave me fire
i took you in / you took me higher
if i wasn't what you wanted
then tell me what it was..."
~ cailyn's song #2 ("all of me") by jms
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:02:44 -0000
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: OT Cardinal Points (was Re: Clockwise without clocks)
> Je ne suis pas Pagan, but IIRC from the handsfasting I
> attended, each cardinal direction is associated with a
> different set of helper spirits. The officiant
> (priest(ess)?) faces each direction as s/he calls out
> for aid from the associated pantheon.
Close enough. It varies from trad to trad, and there are a variety
of concepts and processes going on for the Pagans which aren't
visually evident to the others.
Having the need to be aware of the cardinal directions for 30 years,
the process or orientation has become one of which I'm not always
conscious. More than once someone has asked about a direction, and
I've responded, then later though "How'd I know that?". It's
nothing "mystical" - just some subliminal mental activity.
I knew one HPess (i.e. High Priestess) who was certain she always
new North. Imagine the surprise one night when the moon came up in
the "South".
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:11:23 -0700
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ventricular phonation
Very informative, wow! Thank you, Mark.
My own researching since i first posted the question has led me to conclude
the false-folds are either impossible or very difficult to articulate on their
own. you metioned throat-singing and vibrating the false-folds out of phase
with the vocal folds. This may be a bit tengential, but I know the singer
Chester Bennington is known for being able to produce some kind of diplophonic
scream where he hits a high note (contolled pitch) and there is a definite
ghost note an octave lower. He wont disclose the techinique, and indeed I'm
guessing he discovered the ability by accident and doesn't know himself just
what he's doing. When he does it, his mouth and throat are wide open (he looks
like he's yawning), with his tounge clearly visible and seemingly advanced.
he's notorious for having throat problems towards the end of a tour, which may
be brought on by this.
Mark Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just to clarify a few points here for the phonetically-interested.
1) The ventricular (false vocal) folds do indeed lie above the true vocal
folds. They *are* used in speech, contrary to reports by some previous
correspondents reporting the standard textbook accounts. All kinds of creaky
voice apparently involve adducted (closed) true and false (ventricular)
vocal folds. The adduction of both sets of folds results in a very thick
mass of tissue, normally separated by the ventricle of Morgagni. The range
of voice types which are classified in phonetics is huge, and there is some
debate over how many separate types should be/can be recognised, and what
they're called... Vocal fry (true creak) may be different.
2) Recent laryngoscopic studies indicate that glottal stops often (usually?)
involve adduction of both sets of folds in languages lacking a contrast with
pharyngeal/epiglottal stops (English, Swedish), as do the glottally
reinforced / preglottalised coda/final voiceless stops found in many
varieties of English (General American and Standard British English), e.g.
pack produced as [pa?k].
3) Enlargement of the ventricular folds is never an issue, except when you
have a cold and the mucosal lining of the throat may be inflamed. Obviously
in this case they are more likely to vibrate, but the enlargement cannot be
controlled to produce ventricular phonation.
4) All kinds of more or less radical pharyngeal constriction seem to be
involved in the production of pharyngeal and epiglottal sounds, as well as
tongue-root retraction and larynx raising. Recent work by John Esling
suggests a revision of traditional phonetic categories is required.
5) Diplophonia usually involves the vibration of two sections of the true
vocal folds out of phase with one another, not necessarily the true and
false folds (though the latter may be involved).The section of the vocal
folds between the vocal processes of the arytenoid cartilages and the
thyroid cartilage (ligamental glottis) may vibrate out of phase with rest of
the folds due to strong medial compression of the folds using the lateral
cricoarytenoid muscles. You *can* get a different phase-relationship with
the true and false vocal folds, as in Mongolian throat singing. Some degree
of diplophonia is actually very common without it being pathological: I have
it myself.
6) Ventricular folds are not used for ventriloquism as such: ventriloquism
'simply' involves producing speech with a fixed jaw and lip position, and
uses substitutions of various sound types for e.g. the labials, which are
otherwise visible.
Mark
Mark J. Jones
Department of Linguistics
University of Cambridge
http://kiri.ling.cam.ac.uk/mark
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:57:11 -0400
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
Joe wrote:
> > I've analysed the conditions that led to the humanity and the leading of
> > most of the countries and politics by men. It is a comparision between
>human > civilisations (of european origins and from other independant
>ethnies) and > animals societies (ants, pinguins(those of antartica, not
>from the North > Pole, I think they're both called "pinguins" in english),
>lions, naked mole > rats, elephants..)
>
>
>Just to say - Arctic flightless seabirds are Auks, Antarctic ones Penguins.
ho thanks
that's not obvious because in French, the "pingouins" live in Arctic and the
"manchots" in Antartica
And my English-French dictionnary says "penguin" for both "manchot" AND
"pingouin", says "auk" as second translation for "pingouin", and translates
"auk" as "pingouin" AND "manchot", so...
But I'm pretty well sure that some species of those in Arctic (whatever
their name are :-)) fly, may it be for only 5-15 meters and that those in
Antartica are flightless, are always very straight, and walk by balancing
their weight on their feet (what makes them looking very funny!)
- Max
I don't know who chose those names but they could have done better...
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:11:37 -0700
From: "David J. Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
Barry wrote:
<<
I was commenting on the all too common misconception that language
influences culture and gender views, when it really doesn't. I've not
really found typical Spanish Speakers to be any more aware of gender
in language than English speakers are of the lack of it.
>>
Okay, I think I generally misread your post. Actually, what you
said here is what I agree with. I too have heard all the gender
arguments about language, and some I think have some weight
(e.g., the gender-neutral "he", in "Each student should be at
his desk when the bell rings", when "they" can easily be used),
but, like you, I found many to be ridiculous. (I've never heard
the "womb + man" one before!) So when I said that this struck
a blow for women's rights in my very first e-mail, it was simply
a flippant remark. I didn't meant to *seriously* suggest anything
like that, or about Moro (or non-Moro) society, the way others
have since that post.
So, what Barry wrote here:
<<
What I was saying is this: Just because a language uses gender,
doesn't mean that it's necessarily swayed one way or another socially.
>>
Is something I agree with 100%. I think I sent another e-mail
explaining that what I know of Moro society is that there
seems to be a strict division of labor (e.g., men work and
farm, women raise the children and do all the house work),
and the society doesn't appear to be any more enlightened
than any other (not that it appears overly patriarchal, or
anything).
And, of course, one thing to point out is that when we all
found our consultant's use of "girls" for "children" fascinating,
he was confused as to why. In other words, it was so natural
to him, that he couldn't even conceive of why it would be
out of the ordinary (even though I'm sure he doesn't refer
to children/kids as "girls" when he's speaking English). So
I don't think it's the case that either the society has affected
this lexical choice, or that it affects the mindset of the speakers.
Also, just for clarificatory purposes, Barry wrote:
<<
I never said i thought it was "uninteresting".
I said I wasn't impressed.
>>
Ah, sorry for the misunderstanding. In this case, though, I
wasn't writing this e-mail to impress you. So I'm sorry if
that was confusing.
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:14:31 -0000
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
> In his book _Gender_, Greville Corbett says that there is no clear
> correlation between grammatical gender systems and sex roles in
> human societies.
I'll seek out the book to read, but I seldom take one person's
assertions as universally true.
As to the relationships between social gender and natlangs, I dislike
the ultra-feminist view (i.e. all men are forever out to oppress women
in any & every way) but am willing to entertain the idea that classes,
in a language which already has them, can shift to reflect a male bias.
Q: Am I the only one who perceives professional linguists as prone to
grab onto an idea and run it to its extreme? (e.g. Sapir-Wohrf
hypothesis)?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:20:50 +0100
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
# 1 wrote:
> Joe wrote:
>
>> > I've analysed the conditions that led to the humanity and the
>> leading of
>> > most of the countries and politics by men. It is a comparision between
>> human > civilisations (of european origins and from other independant
>> ethnies) and > animals societies (ants, pinguins(those of antartica, not
>> from the North > Pole, I think they're both called "pinguins" in
>> english),
>> lions, naked mole > rats, elephants..)
>>
>>
>> Just to say - Arctic flightless seabirds are Auks, Antarctic ones
>> Penguins.
>
>
> ho thanks
>
> that's not obvious because in French, the "pingouins" live in Arctic
> and the
> "manchots" in Antartica
>
> And my English-French dictionnary says "penguin" for both "manchot" AND
> "pingouin", says "auk" as second translation for "pingouin", and
> translates
> "auk" as "pingouin" AND "manchot", so...
>
>
> But I'm pretty well sure that some species of those in Arctic (whatever
> their name are :-)) fly, may it be for only 5-15 meters and that those in
> Antartica are flightless, are always very straight, and walk by balancing
> their weight on their feet (what makes them looking very funny!)
Correct you are - my mistake. Auks can still fly, though their wings
are very short, and as such they have to flap very quickly. The species
I'm most familiar with is the Puffin, which can by identified by its
brightly coloured beak.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:21:16 -0000
From: Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: OT: Re: Gender Bending Moro
> But I'm pretty well sure that some species of those in Arctic
>(whatever their name are :-)) fly, may it be for only 5-15 meters
Puffins (they look somewhat like a small penguin) fly. Penguins don't.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:54:36 -0500
From: Damian Yerrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advanced English to become official!
"Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Problem is, Pascal's German, so it's bound to be imperfect.
>
> Oh my, what an ugly arrogant attitude >:(
At least I didn't take it as that. All I understood was "Problem is,
Pascal was brought up around speakers of German, so his English
is bound to be imperfect from a native standpoint purely by lack
of immersive exposure to native speech."
"Thomas Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pascal wrote:
> > I chose this to distinct between normal a and schwa. The carrot
> > [V] is just a short a, so I wrote it as such.
>
> In most dialects of English, including the English spoken by most
> nonnative speakers whose use you value so highly, there is no
> phonemic distinction the carrot [V] and the schwa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
True. An accented /@/ is pronounced /V/, as evidenced by the
phonemic respellings in some English dictionaries published by
Merriam-Webster dictionaries, which use the schwa symbol for
both [V] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Christian Thalmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your ideas certainly have a certain appeal as a thought
> experiment, e.g. for a fictional alternate-history story
> setting where the Germans won WWII and "Germanized" the
> English world.
I agree.
--
Damian
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:29:18 -0700
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advanced English to become official!
--- Damian Yerrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> All I understood
> was "Problem is,
> Pascal was brought up around speakers of German, so
> his English
> is bound to be imperfect from a native standpoint
> purely by lack
> of immersive exposure to native speech."
Kind of like those folks brought up in England,
Australia and the American south. They don't have a
clue how to speak the language properly. ;-)
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:47:48 +0100
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advanced English to become official!
Gary Shannon wrote:
>--- Damian Yerrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>
>
>> All I understood
>>was "Problem is,
>>Pascal was brought up around speakers of German, so
>>his English
>>is bound to be imperfect from a native standpoint
>>purely by lack
>>of immersive exposure to native speech."
>>
>>
>
>Kind of like those folks brought up in England,
>Australia and the American south. They don't have a
>clue how to speak the language properly. ;-)
>
>
I dunno wha' yer talk'n 'bout. I speak English perfeckly. 's easy, ya
know?
:p
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:51:13 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
B. Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Language *can* of course _reflect_ gender views (which is where get
> get all sorts of chestnuts like "woman comes from womb + man,
> reflecting Anglo-Saxon's Patriarchal culture, saying that all womyn
> are, are men with wombs!" (yes, I HAVE heard someone say that -- a
> rather rabid, zealous feminist).
Heh. Well, the more modern etymologies really arent that far off
from that...
http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE175.html
-- I'm sure she would have a field day with that.
Andreas wrote:
> While reflecting about the overwhelming amount of physical work inherent in
> making breakfast, a somewhat un-feministic possible explanation for the Moro
> patterning struck me - might the "girl" word originally have meant "child",
> and
> had its meaning restricted in the singular but not in the plural?
Wasn't "girl" in English itself originally a gender-neutral term?
*Muke!
--
website: http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt: http://kohath.deviantart.com/
FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 17:51:48 EDT
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
In a message dated 4/3/2005 3:15:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>I'll seek out the book [Gender] to read, but I seldom take one person's
>assertions as universally true.
Very wise.
Another interesting book is _Gender Shifts in the History of English_ by Anne
Curzon. She notes (in chapter 5) that the English word "girl" formerly meant
"child (of either sex)." Conceivably, English itself may have gone through a
phase in which the same word (in this case, "girl") was used for "child
(generically)" and "girl (specifically)," like the Moro word you mentioned.
She also says, 'Historically, there is an observable tendency to use
sex-specific terms for male children in contrast to gender-neutral terms for
children,
which must then be assumed to refer to girls. This phenomenon is illustrated
by the word "child" in an OED quotation from Shakespeare's _A Winter's Tale_:
"A very pretty barne; A boy, or a childe, I wonder?" It may be that for
children, as opposed to adults, girls are the more culturally salient subset.
It
has been noted before that words for baby animals often come to refer to
women . . . and it appears that words for human children also show a tendency to
specify to refer to females -- of all ages. A prime example would be the
recent semantic shifts in the English word "babe," which has come to refer to
women, particularly attractive women.' [p. 157]
>As to the relationships between social gender and natlangs, I dislike
>the ultra-feminist view (i.e. all men are forever out to oppress women
>in any & every way) but am willing to entertain the idea that classes,
>in a language which already has them, can shift to reflect a male bias.
Do you have any possible examples in mind?
>Q: Am I the only one who perceives professional linguists as prone to
>grab onto an idea and run it to its extreme? (e.g. Sapir-Wohrf
>hypothesis)?
I'm not sure what you mean here; it is my impression that most linguists are
not enthused about Sapir/Whorf at all, and have no inclination to take it to
extremes.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:12:38 -0000
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gender Bending Moro
--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Bridwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'll seek out the book to read, but I seldom take one person's
>assertions as universally true.
>As to the relationships between social gender and natlangs, I dislike
>the ultra-feminist view (i.e. all men are forever out to oppress
women
>in any & every way) but am willing to entertain the idea that
classes,
>in a language which already has them, can shift to reflect a male
bias.
>Q: Am I the only one who perceives professional linguists as prone to
>grab onto an idea and run it to its extreme? (e.g. Sapir-Wohrf
>hypothesis)?
Y'all might be interested in the novel "The Gate to Women's Country"
by Sheri Teper. It's an account of the relationships between men and
women in a post-apocalyptic setting. I believe it's in California,
although the author doesn't say. It has a very interesting
conclusion.
My limited experience is that there are scientists of all disciplines
who can latch onto to a hypothesis and be unwilling to let it go,
even going so far as to tamper with evidence in some way so as to
protect their hypothesis.
Charlie
htt;//wiki.frath.net/user:caeruleancentaur
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:19:42 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: YAEPT: OMFG I'm a mutant!!! (was Re: Advanced English to become
official!)
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 15:54:36 -0400, Damian Yerrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> True. An accented /@/ is pronounced /V/, as evidenced by the
> phonemic respellings in some English dictionaries published by
> Merriam-Webster dictionaries, which use the schwa symbol for
> both [V] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I seem to be at odds with the entire English-speaking world. Not only do I
distinguish /i\/ from /@/ (which apparently is unheard of in both American
and British dictionaries, but to my ear as clear as a bell in actual
speech on both sides of the pond), but I clearly have [V] for /V/, and
never [EMAIL PROTECTED] A stressed /@/ in my lect is pronounced as whatever
vowel it
was reduced from, which is almost universally reconstructable based on
English's lovely morphoetymological spelling, and a small measure of
knowledge of etymology.
On this subject (honestly, there's a connection if you dig for it), what
is the Hebrew pronunciation of the word anglicised |schwa|, or for that
matter the approved pronunciation in English speaking linguistics circles?
I flit between /Sv@/ and /SwA/, and several others.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
