[Spellyans] A little essay for "Penny"
Jon Mills
j.mills at email.com
Wed Feb 11 16:45:38 GMT 2009
Thank you, Michael. That's a lot clearer.
Jon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Everson" <everson at evertype.com>
> To: "Standard Cornish discussion list" <spellyans at kernowek.net>
> Subject: Re: [Spellyans] A little essay for "Penny"
> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:49:37 +0000
>
>
> On 11 Feb 2009, at 13:17, Jon Mills wrote:
>
> > You write, "The phonemic distinction is voiceless and voiced."
> >
> > Phonemes are determined by minimal contrast. Thus /p/ and /d/ are
> > determined to be separate phonemes of English in the minimal
> > contrast pair 'pie' and 'die'. However a phoneme is not
> > necessarily determined by contrast of only one distinctive
> > feature. /p/ has the features: bilabial, plosive, fortis and
> > voiceless. /d/ has the features: alveolar, plosive, lenis and
> > voiced.
>
> It is equally true to say that all of the features are not
> necessarily relevant to determining a phoneme. In English, /p/ and
> /b/ are distinct because of voicing. /p/ whether fortis or lenis
> is still / p/; /b/ whether fortis or lenis is still /b/.
>
> > I still do not understand why you maintain that "It is unlikely
> > that Dolly Pentreath or her contemporaries were speaking English
> > or Cornish with fortis and lenis consonants ...." Since
> > Proto-brythonic and Proto-germanic were not spoken in the time
> > of Dolly Pentreath, they have little bearing on whether Dolly
> > Pentreath distinguished fortis and lenis consonants.
>
> The discussion was with one of our Kebmyn colleagues. They believe
> that fortis and lenis were active features throughout much of the
> Middle Cornish period.
>
> > If the language contact to which you are referring is between
> > Cornish and English, and you are supposing that the phonology of
> > English somehow influenced Cornish phonology, then one must
> > assume that Dolly Pentreath would have distinguished fortis and
> > lenis, because English did. Or are you seriously suggesting that
> > Dolly Pentreath pronounced /p/, /t/ and /k/ as voiceless but not
> > fortis, and /b/, /d/ and /g/ as voiced but not lenis?
>
> I'm saying that fortis and lenis are ancillary to the phonology of
> the English phonemes (as is aspiration, cf. "pit" and "spit") and
> that even if fortis and lenis were a stronger feature in the
> phonemics of earlier Cornish, certainly by 1750 (indeed doubtless
> by 1650) the fortis/lenis distinction had been assimilated to
> voiceless/voiced due to mutual contact with English. That there is
> no trace of anything like a strong fortis/lenis distinction in the
> English of Cornwall suggests that it could not have been a salient
> feature of Tudor or Late Cornish.
>
> (Fortis and lenis are salient features in some northern dialects of
> English; interestingly and not surprisingly one finds similar
> features in Danish.)
>
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>
_____________________________________
Dr. Jon Mills,
School of European Culture and Languages,
University of Kent
--
Be Yourself @ mail.com!
Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
More information about the Spellyans
mailing list