Fun with sesquisyllables

[Ketsuban]

Elsewhere on the internet I found myself needing an example of an English two-syllable word where the two syllables are meaningless independently, and considered rhythm before deciding that rhythmic was clearer. After clicking "post" I realised I'd created a contradiction: I'd syllabified the former as rhy-thm (which implies the latter is rhy-thmic) but the latter as rhyth-mic (implying rhyth-m). Which of these is correct? Is ambiguity like this found in other languages with reduced syllables?

[xxx]

rhyth-mic /ˈrɪð.mɪk/ is correct but mic is not meaningless...

[Lērisama]

Elsewhere on the internet I found myself needing an example of an English two-syllable word where the two syllables are meaningless independently, and considered rhythm before deciding that rhythmic was clearer. After clicking "post" I realised I'd created a contradiction: I'd syllabified the former as rhy-thm (which implies the latter is rhy-thmic) but the latter as rhyth-mic (implying rhyth-m). Which of these is correct? Is ambiguity like this found in other languages with reduced syllables?

I would syllabify them like you did. English syllabification is weird

[Travis B.]

Elsewhere on the internet I found myself needing an example of an English two-syllable word where the two syllables are meaningless independently, and considered rhythm before deciding that rhythmic was clearer. After clicking "post" I realised I'd created a contradiction: I'd syllabified the former as rhy-thm (which implies the latter is rhy-thmic) but the latter as rhyth-mic (implying rhyth-m). Which of these is correct? Is ambiguity like this found in other languages with reduced syllables?

I would syllabify them like you did. English syllabification is weird

As would I.

[Richard W]

Elsewhere on the internet I found myself needing an example of an English two-syllable word where the two syllables are meaningless independently, and considered rhythm before deciding that rhythmic was clearer. After clicking "post" I realised I'd created a contradiction: I'd syllabified the former as rhy-thm (which implies the latter is rhy-thmic) but the latter as rhyth-mic (implying rhyth-m). Which of these is correct? Is ambiguity like this found in other languages with reduced syllables?

Yes. Compare Greek ănḗr 'man' (nom. s.) with ăndrós (gen. s.) or Russian Oleg and Olga. And cross-linguistically, it is very common with VC suffixes, as with English meet and meeting, with the final consonant becoming the initial consonant of the suffixed form.

[Darren]

I think in English trochees there's no meaningful way to syllabify the intervocalic consonant, it's just ambisyllabic. If you're gonna speak it out in syllables, then it'll attach to the preceding vowel if it's lax and to the following if tense (in monomorphemic forms at least)