LINGUIST List 10.968

Mon Jun 21 1999

Qs: Phonetic Neutralization, Eskimo Snow Words

Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karenlinguistlist.org>



We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

Directory

  • Richard Sproat, Avoidance of phonetic neutralization
  • Ion, Perception, Eskimos, and Snow

    Message 1: Avoidance of phonetic neutralization

     Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 20:30:35 -0400
    From: Richard Sproat <rwsresearch.att.com>
    Subject: Avoidance of phonetic neutralization


    Can anyone point me to any studies of spontaneous speech that purport to show that speakers may avoid certain phonetic alternations in a given context that could result in ambiguities in that context?

    To take an (admittedly not very good) example might speakers of American English avoid flapping /t/ in "latter" in contexts where it might be confusable with "ladder".

    Obviously there is anecdotal evidence that people will occasionally consciously avoid such alternations in such contexts, but I am interested in knowing if there is any evidence of a more systematic unconscious avoidance.

    Please reply to me directly and I will post a summary to the List if I get sufficient responses.

    - Richard Sproat Human/Computer Interface Research rwsresearch.att.com AT&T Labs -- Research, Shannon Laboratory Tel: +1-973-360-8490 180 Park Avenue, Room E153, P.O.Box 971 Fax: +1-973-360-8809 Florham Park, NJ 07932-0000 - --------------http://www.research.att.com/~rws/

    Message 2: Perception, Eskimos, and Snow

     Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 12:54:51 +0100
    From: Ion <iongcsl.com>
    Subject: Perception, Eskimos, and Snow


    Dear all

    In my research I have come across the familiar statement on the Eskimos' possession of some 30 different names for snow. It stems from research I am doing on the existential phenomenological underpinnings of Von Bertalanffy's General System Theory (Braziller, 1969). It is important for me to ensure that Von Bertalanffy's suppositions are correct on this issue and I therefore seek your help.

    I outline my research question below.

    In his writings von Bertalanffy claims that:

    The Eskimos are said to have some 30 different names for 'snow', doubtless because it is vitally important for them to make fine distinctions while, for us, differences are negligible. Conversely, we call machines which are only superficially different, by the names of Fords, Cadillacs, Pontiacs and so forth, while for the Eskimos they would be pretty much the same.

    Merleau-Ponty, in his Phenomenology of Perception, refers to Katz's research:

    The Maoris have 3,000 names of colours, not because they perceive a great many, but, on the contrary, because they fail to identify them when they belong to objects structurally different from each other.

    I wish to focus on this element of structure.

    Could it not be then that the Eskimos have some 30 different names for "snow", not necessarily because it is vitally important to them but, because they fail to identify snow as being just snow when it corresponds to objects structurally different from each other? For it is not that snow is vitally important to them but its relation to a structure on which it is present?

    Also, do we not assign so many names to cars because we wish to identify them by their "superficial" structural differences? Perhaps we assign so many names because we fail to identify "car" when it belongs "to objects structurally different from each other" - no matter whether the differences can be perceived as superficial or not.

    Indeed, ignore the adjective "superficial" and just concentrate on "structure" - for even the most superficial change is a structural change.

    Now: do we not assign so many names to cars because we wish to identify them by their structural differences?

    I would be grateful if you could clarify the Eskimo issue for me, as well as provide any additional information/comments which you feel would be of relevance.

    Please reply off-list to iongcsl.com. If there is interest, I can collect the responses and post them publicly in due course.

    With my warmest thanks Ion Georgiou