Linguistic Miscellany Thread

[Linguoboy]

This makes me wonder: How would you translate studieren into English?

It would depend on the context. These relationships are always many-to-many. As Frislander points out about, one possible translation is "read".

[Vijay]

In Malayalam, you "knock" a drum, "blow" a flute, "read" all other musical instruments I can think of, and I believe "put" recorded media. (This last part is like Spanish).

On a related note traditionally at the University of Cambridge you "read" your subject rather than "study" it (this usage is declining though as Cambridge assimilates to the majority of British universities linguistically).

There's some overlap between 'read' and 'study' in a lot of Indian languages, too (not so much in Malayalam; we have the 'read' vs. 'play an instrument' overlap instead, I guess ). AFAIK at least in Hindi, Urdu, Bengali, and Tamil, you don't "study" in school; you "read." In Malayalam, you do "study," but the verb for 'study' in Malayalam is cognate with the word for 'read' in all these other languages (Malayalam and Tamil borrowed this word from Sanskrit).

[hwhatting]

In Kazakh and Uzbek, the words for "read" and "learn" also are the same.

[akam chinjir]

Yeah, you can do the same in Mandarin; "讀" tends to refer specifically to reading aloud.

Earlier this week heard someone (primarily a Cantonese-speaker, but speaking English) distinguish between Chinese and Mandarin. Now curious how common that is (speaking here as someone who can get a bit of a chip on my shoulder when people use "Chinese" to refer to Mandarin or putonghua).

[Linguoboy]

Earlier this week heard someone (primarily a Cantonese-speaker, but speaking English) distinguish between Chinese and Mandarin.

Can you give me some idea of the context? I can see getting tetchy at the suggestion that all Chinese is Mandarin, but it doesn't really make any sense to say that Mandarin isn't "Chinese".

I'm in favour of using "Standard Chinese" to refer to pǔtōnghuà/guóyǔ and abbreviating this to "Chinese" when clear from context (in the same way that, e.g. "Standard German" refers to a particular variety based chiefly on East Central German and it commonly called just "German").

[akam chinjir]

Ah, I should've been clearer---when he said "Chinese" he was referring to Cantonese (this was in Hong Kong). It was the manager (owner? not really sure) of a shop, he described one of the salespeople as able to speak Chinese, Mandarin, and English.

[xxx]

a word can mean a thousand things depending on the space and the time it is pronounced ...
at the limit, each context of employment activates a new face ... which can become official (in the sense of sedimented in a dictionary) depending on historical conditions ...

[anteallach]

As I have mentioned previously, my idiolect has marked palatalization of /t/ in quite a few words where GA lacks it, and I notice that at least my mother has this as well. (I can confirm she pronounces sister as [ˈsɘɕtɕʁ̩(ː)].) But one word in particular that sticks out which I notice myself having palatalization is tarantula, which has not only the usual palatalization of historical /t/ before /j/ but also palatalization of the initial /t/, as [tɕʰʁ̩ːˈʁɛ̃tʃɯːɰə(ː)].

That's not unexpected palatalization so much as syncope then retraction before /r/, like in <tree> [tʃʰɹiː], <straight> [stʃɹeɪ̯ʔ]~[ʃtʃɹeɪ̯ʔ], or <dry> [dʒɹɑɪ̯]. If I dropped the first schwa in <tarantula> I'd produce something like [ˈtʃʰɹæ̃ʔtʃɫ̩ə].

EDIT: That pronunciation of <sister> is unusual, though, I agree. Also, I forgot about a source of historical /j/.

The difference is that the /r/ in my tarantula is syllabic, and normally syllabic /r/ does not trigger retraction and affrication of /t/ in NAE. Similar examples for me include fac[tʃ]ory, re[ɕtɕ]aurant, and refrac[tʃ]ory.

In most of these words I think this is due to compression phenomena; they have different forms with different numbers of syllables, sometimes even within the same idiolect. (E.g. I can pronounce restaurant with either two or three syllables.) The compressed form naturally gets the affrication and retraction before /r/, giving forms like [ˈɹɛʂtʂɹɒnt]; if that [tʂ] then comes to be thought of as /tʃ/ rather than /t/, it's not that surprising that it spreads into the three syllable form, giving [ˈɹɛʃtʃəɹɒnt] or similar. This happens in my accent [1] too, so it's not something particularly localised.

It doesn't seem to happen, for me, in words where the /tər/ comes before the stress, like tarantula or terrific, and indeed I think that even if these words are compressed I have an actual [tɹ] there without the retraction and affrication. However, I don't find it surprising, and I've certainly heard pronunciations of terrific with affrication.

It's much harder to explain sister that way, though, and I've not noticed that in British English. (I guess you could come up with some explanation involving compression followed by affrication in sister in law and it extending by analogy back to sister, but that doesn't seem very likely.) Is it just that word, or do other words historically ending /stər/ get the same treatment?

[1] Mild Northern English of the sort which has TRAP=BATH but not FOOT=STRUT. But I've also heard pronunciations of restaurant like that from people with more "SSBE" type accents.

[Salmoneus]

That's not unexpected palatalization so much as syncope then retraction before /r/, like in <tree> [tʃʰɹiː], <straight> [stʃɹeɪ̯ʔ]~[ʃtʃɹeɪ̯ʔ], or <dry> [dʒɹɑɪ̯]. If I dropped the first schwa in <tarantula> I'd produce something like [ˈtʃʰɹæ̃ʔtʃɫ̩ə].

EDIT: That pronunciation of <sister> is unusual, though, I agree. Also, I forgot about a source of historical /j/.

The difference is that the /r/ in my tarantula is syllabic, and normally syllabic /r/ does not trigger retraction and affrication of /t/ in NAE. Similar examples for me include fac[tʃ]ory, re[ɕtɕ]aurant, and refrac[tʃ]ory.

In most of these words I think this is due to compression phenomena; they have different forms with different numbers of syllables, sometimes even within the same idiolect. (E.g. I can pronounce restaurant with either two or three syllables.) The compressed form naturally gets the affrication and retraction before /r/, giving forms like [ˈɹɛʂtʂɹɒnt]; if that [tʂ] then comes to be thought of as /tʃ/ rather than /t/, it's not that surprising that it spreads into the three syllable form, giving [ˈɹɛʃtʃəɹɒnt] or similar. This happens in my accent [1] too, so it's not something particularly localised.

It doesn't seem to happen, for me, in words where the /tər/ comes before the stress, like tarantula or terrific, and indeed I think that even if these words are compressed I have an actual [tɹ] there without the retraction and affrication. However, I don't find it surprising, and I've certainly heard pronunciations of terrific with affrication.

It's much harder to explain sister that way, though, and I've not noticed that in British English. (I guess you could come up with some explanation involving compression followed by affrication in sister in law and it extending by analogy back to sister, but that doesn't seem very likely.) Is it just that word, or do other words historically ending /stər/ get the same treatment?

[1] Mild Northern English of the sort which has TRAP=BATH but not FOOT=STRUT. But I've also heard pronunciations of restaurant like that from people with more "SSBE" type accents.

I don't think of affrication as an SSBE thing, and I have very little of it. I don't think I've ever heard it in 'terrific' (nor 'torrential').

But I HAVE heard it in 'tarantula', and may even have said it that way as a child. To me, 'churranchula' is just one of those ad hoc children's errors (like 'chimley' and 'skellington' and the like), probably caused by long-range assimilation to the following affricate, hastened by the unusualness of the word's form in general.

[Pabappa]

Anyone else ever said "your churn!" playing a game? I'm pretty sure I knew better but I don't think I'd have randomly made that up either.

Sister would not retract it's/ t/ for nonrhotic speakers even if it did in those other words (some nonrhotic speakers reintroduced the r in stressed syllables ).

[Travis B.]

I distinctly remember that from a young age I pronounced mister as [ˈmɘɕtɕʁ̩(ː)] before I switched to the pronunciation [ˈmɘsʲːʁ̩(ː)], which is more common here.

[Salmoneus]

Oh, an alternative way of looking at changes like ter > tcher... sulcalisation!

Rhotic vowels are typically sulcalised - indeed, /3/ is typically sulcalised even in non-rhotic dialects. And what effect does sulcalisation often have on neighbouring consonants? Affrication!

[xxx]

a word can be pronounced a thousand ways depending on the space and the time it is used ...
at the limit, each speaker activates a new face ... which can become official (in the sense of sedimented in a dictionary) depending on historical conditions ...

a word can mean a thousand things depending on the space and the time it is pronounced ...
at the limit, each context of employment activates a new face ... which can become official (in the sense of sedimented in a dictionary) depending on historical conditions ...

my gosh ! what is a word...

[Tropylium]

And what effect does sulcalisation often have on neighbouring consonants?

I'd say "no one knows well enough, because sulcalization as a distinct articulation almost never comes up in any language"…

[Travis B.]

Oh, an alternative way of looking at changes like ter > tcher... sulcalisation!

Rhotic vowels are typically sulcalised - indeed, /3/ is typically sulcalised even in non-rhotic dialects. And what effect does sulcalisation often have on neighbouring consonants? Affrication!

I should note that in addition to /ər/ or /ɜr/ (this distinction is artificial in my dialect, since the two are homophonous in it), /uː ʊ w/ also trigger palatalization and/or affrication in coronals, particularly /t/. I personally normally only have palatalization without affrication or with only very slight affrication, with the exception of the word two which I sometimes pronounce as [tsʲʰʉ̯u(ː)], but I have heard people with pronunciations of words such as twenty with very marked palatalization and affrication (i.e. as [ˈtɕʰwʌ̃ɾ̃i(ː)]~[ˈtɕʰwʌ̃ːi̯] in an particularly annoying radio commercial for a local lawyer).

[So Haleza Grise]

A list of Nahuatl place names in Nicaragua, if anyone is looking for onomastic inspiration.

[anteallach]

Oh, an alternative way of looking at changes like ter > tcher... sulcalisation!

Rhotic vowels are typically sulcalised - indeed, /3/ is typically sulcalised even in non-rhotic dialects. And what effect does sulcalisation often have on neighbouring consonants? Affrication!

I should note that in addition to /ər/ or /ɜr/ (this distinction is artificial in my dialect, since the two are homophonous in it), /uː ʊ w/ also trigger palatalization and/or affrication in coronals, particularly /t/. I personally normally only have palatalization without affrication or with only very slight affrication, with the exception of the word two which I sometimes pronounce as [tsʲʰʉ̯u(ː)], but I have heard people with pronunciations of words such as twenty with very marked palatalization and affrication (i.e. as [ˈtɕʰwʌ̃ɾ̃i(ː)]~[ˈtɕʰwʌ̃ːi̯] in an particularly annoying radio commercial for a local lawyer).

Affrication of /t/ before /w/ to [tʃ] or similar also occasionally happens in BrE. (How occasionally I don't know; I definitely don't have it, and don't notice it often.) I've not heard of it before those vowels, though, except of course in words which historically have /tj/.

I distinctly remember that from a young age I pronounced mister as [ˈmɘɕtɕʁ̩(ː)] before I switched to the pronunciation [ˈmɘsʲːʁ̩(ː)], which is more common here.

OK, that suggests that there's something going on generally in /stər/ words. Whereas I'm pretty sure that in my accent all the cases of unexpected affrication (restaurant and various words ending -ctory are the ones I can think of) can be explained by the compression argument.

I don't think of affrication as an SSBE thing, and I have very little of it. I don't think I've ever heard it in 'terrific' (nor 'torrential').

I've heard it from SSBE speakers in terrific when compressed: [ˈtʂɹɪfɪk ] or the like; I don't know whether I've heard it when uncompressed. (As I said I don't have it in that word either way.) There's a fair amount of variation in /tr/ words in general, from something like the traditional RP pronunciation with the /t/ and /r/ merging into a non-sibilant (I think) affricate to a pretty much full on [tʃɹ].

[akam chinjir]

Does anyone know of a case where the subject of an embedded clause is marked as a possessor using morphology (or whatever) specific to inalienable possession?

[Linguoboy]

crab rangoon: count noun or mass noun?

[Pabappa]

Count noun for me, but the plural can only be "crab rangoons", never *crabs rangoon, perhaps because the pieces are not made from individual crabs.