Editor for this issue: <>
On Fri 31 Mar 1995 (LINGUIST List: Vol-6-480) I posted a query on orthographical representations of stressed schwa in English and on hesitation vowels in languages generally. The connection between these two questions is tenuous, perhaps simply that that they came up together in the course of a class, and I should really have separated them before posting them; also, I should obviously have worded them better. I'll rephrase them here, hopefully more clearly, and summarise the replies I received. First, thanks to the following: Wenchao Li (wcliMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuevax.ox.ac.uk) MARC PICARD (PICARD
VAX2.CONCORDIA.CA) Caoimhin P. ODonnaile (caoimhin
smo.ac.uk) Tim Pulju (PULJU
ricevm1.rice.edu) Steven Schaufele (fcosws
prairienet.org) John Cowan (lojbab
access.digex.net) Claude Boisson (Claude.Boisson
mrash.fr) Steven Blackwelder (SBLACKWELDER
firstbyte.ccmail.compuserve.com) Julie Vonwiller (julie
speech.su.oz.au) Steven Schaufele (fcosws
prairienet.org) Achim Stenzel (fs3a505
rrz.uni-hamburg.de) Don Churma (00dgchurma
bsuvc.bsu.edu) FIRST QUERY In view of the notorious fact that English orthography has no unambiguous method of transcribing schwa, its most common phonetic segment (by a wide margin), I asked for examples of how orthographical representations of schwa in Standard English differ in rhotic- and non-rhotic areas. The examples I gave were the hesitation-particles (spelt _er_, _erm_ in British English and _uh_, _uhm_, and the representations of weak _you_ as British _yer_ vs. American _yuh/ya_. For clarity, consider only the pair _er/uh_. I assume that these are different representations of the same word, pronounced more or less the same (a schwa of varying length) in both varieties, but necessarily spelt differently because of different relationships between the (same) spelling and (differing) phonologies of the two varieties. The result is that Br/Am readers misread each other's hesitation particles: -- most British readers make a clear distinction between the CUT-vowel and schwa, and since they don't use the CUT-vowel in the hesitation particle, they misread the spelling _uh_ as a sort of grunt; -- most American readers are rhotic, so that _er_ doesn't register to them as a simple schwa either. Thus American readers tend to think the British hesitate with a burr, which they don't; and British readers tend to think Americans hesitate like gorillas, which they don't (mostly). For the record, the only further example of such spelling that I received was Julie Vonwiller's Australian 'um', of which more below. I then went on to ask for examples of LITERARY representations of explicit stressed schwa. By this I meant examples of metalanguage where people are _citing_ scwha; an imaginary example might be a discussion on whether the-with-schwa or the- with-/i:/ were correct in a given phrase. The example I gave, and the only one I knew, was the quote from Winnie-the-Pooh (more below). In some ways I also drew a blank here, since nobody had any new examples for me; but I got a weird and wonderful range of comments on Winnie-the-Pooh which I think it's worth summarising here, since they say something about how Brits/Americans (and others) read and misread each other's canonical texts. Here's the Pooh quote again. Christopher Robin has been asked whether 'Winnie' isn't really a girl's name. He replies that the bear's name isn't Winnie: 'He's Winnie-ther-Pooh. Don't you know what _ther_ means?' 'Ah, yes, now I do,' I explained quickly; and I hope you do too, because it is all the explanation you are going to get. My contention is that a speaker of C.R.'s dialect would not misunderstand this point. C.R.'s answer can be paraphrased: 'Don't you understand the implications of the definite article /dh
/ here? It confers all the obvious masculinity of the name Pooh onto the whole NP.' But in order to bring this point over Milne is up against an orthographical constraint: if he italicises _the_ it will be read with the strong vowel /i:/, the Southern British citation form of the article, which is also the stressed form of the article carrying the further meaning 'the one and only, the great', which is not C.R.'s meaning. (NB Steven Schaufele pointed out that this usage is impossible in his English). British orthography has only one apparatus for coding stressed schwa, involving the letter 'r', as in prefer, bird, turn, etc. American English can use 'u' followed by the 'open syllable' symbol 'h', since American CUT and schwa are often close or fully merged. Thus an American *translation* of C.R.'s answer would be: 'He's Winnie-thuh-Pooh. Don't you know what _thuh_ means?' Several American responses to my query showed that this point doesn't always come over to a rhotic reader, even if he is a linguist. John Cowan's response here summed it up best: )And to think that for thirty years, winding up with )reading WtP to my daughter a few months ago, I have )interpreted this in my native dialect as /wIniDRpu/ (D = )edh, R = vocalic American r) and assumed that it was a )typical example of a child not knowing how to account for )something and inventing a specious explanation involving a )made-up word. Enlightenment at last! A couple of interesting theories were mooted in the responses. Achim Stenzel suggested: )By using the form *ther*, Christopher Robin (i.e. Milne) )alludes to the German article *der* which is masculine, )whereas the conventionally stressed form *thee* would )inappropriately allude to the feminine form of the German )article? This suggestion has far-reaching political and nationalistic implications, given the date of the first edition (1926), and I have pondered it deeply. Tim Pulju had another suggestion involving )the translation of Winnie the Pooh into Latin, namely )Winnie Ille Pooh. I've noticed that that opening exchange )about Pooh's gender makes a lot more sense in Latin. When C.R. asks, in English, "Don't you know what )`ther' means?", the implication is bizarre, as if 'ther' )means 'male' in English. Of course, we are expected to )chalk it up as just another cute thing that )kids say. )In Latin, however, when Christophorus Robinus asks, )"Nescis, quod significet 'ille'?", the question makes )perfect sense, especially in a late Vulgar )Latin context, when 'ille' was largely done shifting from )"that (masc. sg." to "he". Which leads to my conclusion )that the work was actually written in Latin, and that the )English version has a somewhat infelicitous translation of )the exchange in question. German, Latin ... any further suggestions? SECOND QUERY My second query on hesitation vowels in other languages evoked more straightforward replies. Don Churma and Claude Boisson cottoned on to my underlying idea; I was interested in the 'most neutral' vowel in a language, with the idea that this might have some bearing on the shape of the language's vowel- system. Don referred me to "The basis of articulation", Lawrence Schourup (1983), _Ohio State U. Working Papers in Linguistics_ 25:1-13 and Claude suggested: )On peut postuler que cela est lie a ce que l'on a appele la )"base articulatoire" caracteristique de chaque langue (sur ce )concept, voir Honikman 1964 ; Keltz 1971 ; Pike 1967)... I still have to get these references from Claude sorted out. Several people gave me information on hesitation WORDS as well as vowels in various languages (John Cowan, Steven Blackwelder, Caoimhin ODonnaile, Claude Boisson). I won't summarise that information here (get in touch with me if you're interested), but I'd like to enlarge on the orthographical form 'um' noted in Australian Engl by Julie Vonwiller. This also exists in British English. I have the feeling that this can also become a lexicalised hesitation word, when it will assume (in Brit) the CUT-vowel (different from Schwa); i.e. it becomes lexicalised and assumes the referent 'I am hesitating', like 'ouch' and 'phew' (which were once non-verbals). This can be contrasted with the DELEXICALIZED hesitation WORDS : well, sort of, kind of, like, I mean (Icelandic sko, sem sagt - you think of them in your own language), which have lost their meaning and are mostly used unconsciously. Anyway, here's the summary of hesitation-vowels: Language hesitation vowel source Mandarin scwha Wenchao Li certain Wu dialects [e] Wenchao Li Min dialects low central [a] Wenchao Li French mid high front rounded Marc Picard Canadian French schwa Marc Picard Polish ("when speaking English") nasalized prepalatalized ash Tim Puljin Australian English often long [a:] Julie Vonwiller Argentinian Spanish lax high central Don Churma Hausa prolongation of preceding vowel Don Churma to which I'll add: Scots [e:] Icelandic [e] and [e:] half closed front occ. rising to [I:] (some women speakers) Not much of a list; but a lot of what I was looking for came in an interesting article sent me by Claude Boisson. I won't try to summarize his article here, but Claude will doubtless email it to anyone interested. Thanks everyone! Petur Knutsson telephone: (+354) 569 4456 Heimspekideild/Faculty of Arts fax: (+354) 569 4410 University of Iceland, Rekjavik email: peturk
rhi.hi.is