Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!news.erinet.com!netcom.com!sarima
From: sarima@netcom.com (Stanley Friesen)
Subject: Re: Question: Vowelless word
Message-ID: <sarimaD68n27.D3H@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3jtjjn$s5k@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au> <1995Mar16.185556.12295@chemabs.uucp> <D62AKy.6vJ@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <3l6v0s$k1q@news.nd.edu>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 05:25:19 GMT
Lines: 24
Sender: sarima@netcom3.netcom.com

In article <3l6v0s$k1q@news.nd.edu>,
scharle <scharle@lukasiewicz.cc.nd.edu> wrote:
>|> Are we dealing with two conflicting definitions of `vowel' here?
>|> 
>|> (1) /r/ in _trg_ is a vowel because it is the peak of a syllable.
>|>    Since every syllable has a peak, every syllable has a vowel, so
>|>    a vowelless word has to be non-syllabic.  I can think of seven
>
>   Then the English interjection "tsk" pronounced /t!/ is not vowelless?

As near as I can tell, this is indeed non-syllabic, and thus has
no vowel.  However, it is also extra-linguistic, much like uh-huh.

>Or "psst" /s/ and "sh" /S/?

These seem to me to be syllabic, so under definition #1 I would say that
the /s/ or /S/ *is* acting as a vowel.


-- 
NAMES: sarima@netcom.com swf@ElSegundoCA.attgis.com

May the peace of God be with you.

