Hello
I would like that someone could tell me in plain english what does exactly mean the next highlighted sentence of a quote from the definition of Aspiration.
Thank you!English voiceless stop consonants are aspirated for most native speakers when they are word-initial or begin a stressed syllable, as in "pen", "ten", "Ken". They are unaspirated for almost all speakers when immediately following word-initial s, as in "spun", "stun", "skunk". After s elsewhere in a word they are normally unaspirated as well, except when the cluster is heteromorphemic and the stop belongs to an unbound morpheme; compare dis [t] end vs. dis [tʰ] aste.
Ermaks
Source en.academic.ru
Last edited by Ermaks; 03-Jul-2010 at 18:04. Reason: Forgot to include source
Welcome to the board, Ermaks.
WOW! For a first question that's a humdinger.
Sorry, but I've been a native speaker for 72 years and somehow I've managed to get by without that sort of stuff ever impingeing on my consciousness.
I await with interest the replies of others. To me it's as clear as mud.
Rover:)
This is somewhat of an educated guess.
The cluster /st/ is homomorphic in 'distend' because 's' and 't' belong to the same morphemes, while in distaste, the 's' belongs to 'dis' and the 't' belongs to 'taste' thus making /st/ a heteromorphic cluster.
1. Homomorphic /st/ clusters: distance, lust, waste, castle, cluster ...
2. Heteromorphic /st/ clusters: distemper, mistreat, mistake.
In list 1, the /t/ is less aspirated. In list 2, the 't' is given it's full value as if it were the start of a new word.
(So, you might hear something like 'disdance', but not 'disdemper'.)
And unbound morpheme is one that can stand alone. In 'distaste, 'taste' is an unbound (free) morpheme, and 'dis' is a bound morpheme. Since the 't' belong to the unbound morpheme, it is fully aspirated.
Since 'distance' is not made up of 'dis' and 'tance' [I would guess 'di' and 'stance'], the 'st' cluster belongs to the same morpheme - it's homomorphic, and hence the unbound morpheme rule doesn't apply.
As Rover said (or implied) most native speakers get by perfectly well by knowing this stuff. People other than linguists think that Audrey Hepburn (with a Dutch background, and so with missing 'aspirated stops'), for example, just has a sexy voice. A phonology lecturer of mine showed his humourlessness by dismissing the Goons as 'nothing more than applied secondary articulation'
('"Applied secondary articulation" is linguist-speak for "funny voices".)
b
Yes, this thread should possibly have posted to the linguistics sub-forum to avoid frightening the horses!