Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dawnstorm I wonder if [static is] connected to absolute pitch in music? |
Well, if anything, it's [ej] hypothesis or [aen] hypothesis.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dawnstorm The point was: if you don't know how to use a hammer and what to use it for or on, then it's just an object you may find useful, depending on the connections you make. (Pacman will eat it.) |
Yet the assumption there is that the tool was there all along. Surely that's not the case with distinctive features, that that the bundles (phonemes) are mapped prior to experience?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dawnstorm I'm not convinced. Phonemes don't describe phones. / ... / That is not part of the phone, but part of the perception of a phone. |
Production, though, isn't perception. I get what you're saying about perception being questionable when it comes to quantification (similar to your point here:
How will you arrive at a theory, when you have to research the effect the reception of your hypothesis had on your hypothesis? The effect is quite negligible when it comes to phonemes, I admit), but articulation?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dawnstorm We're understanding the features, we're understanding the distinctions, but we don't really understand how distinction making relates both to phonemes and hypothesis about phonems. |
Wait... when did distinctive features become hypothetical?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dawnstorm Try the consciousness discussions in neuroscience (Chinese Room, Neuroscientist Called Mary...). I'm not derailing this thread even further, if that's okay with you? |
Yes, it's fine. Could you give me the gist?
I agree with biana, I am enjoying the discussion.
