|
|
Would you call the [x] in ''loch'' a phoneme or an allophone of /h/? I say it's a
phoneme but it could equally just be an allophone of /h/.
|
|
|
It's either an allophone of /k/ or it's own phoneme depending on your dialect (or
idiolect). It's definitely its own phoneme in some parts of Britian (notably Scotland)
but generally not so outside.
|
|
|
[k] is an allophone of [x] in standard pronunciations.
|
|
|
By which Mxsmanic refers to Mid-western USA, RP and (maybe) Esturay English but definitely
not Scottish nor Welsh nor Cornish.
|
|
''It's either an allophone of /k/ or it's own phoneme depending on your dialect (or
idiolect).''
Jim, What is the difference between a dialect and an idiolect. Aren't they the same
thing?
|
|
Mxsmanic,
Just making things clear.
Fisherman,
An idiolect is the language, the grammar/pronunciation/vocab./etc., of an individual
person. A dialect is the language of a group of people.
|
|
''An idiolect is the language, the grammar/pronunciation/vocab./etc., of an individual
person. A dialect is the language of a group of people.''
So, therefore, the correct thing to say would be that the phoneme /K/ exists in my
idiolect and not my dialect.
Does /K/ exist in your idiolect?
Also, how many phonemes are in your accent or in English. See linked thread,
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/2004/5904.htm
|
|
|
I might exist in your dialect ... if you're Scottish, for example.
|
|
|
"I might exist in your dialect ..." I think not. Typo: "It might exist in your
dialect ..."
|
|
|
Well since [x] only appears in one word in English, that being loch, it seems impossible
to believe that they are not allophones. Unless someone can find me a minimal pair
where they assign different meaning.
|
|
|
Och y' cannae right on that one laddie ... only one word? Nay. And by the way,
"loch" and "lock" mean different things.
|
|
I think James Rose was talking about [x] and [h] not [x] and [k].
[h] only ever occurs at the beginning of a word and [x] only ever occurs at the end
of a word and they are very similar sounds too. So, therefore you could say that
[x] and [h] are allophones.
[x] and [h] sound similar enough to be considered allophones.
|
|
|
Only most people who don't use [x] would use [k] in its place. Hence if you've got
no [x], then it's an allophone of /k/ not /h/.
|
|
I agree.
I pronounce the word "or-chid"
with [x]
most people pronounce it with a [k].
Regards, Paul V.
|
