En réponse à David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>:

>     Then mine is, too.  :)  I realize phonetically and acoustically
> why
> voiceless sounds require more oomph, but voiced sounds seem harder.
> Why?
> They're louder, first of all, so they hit the ears harder.  Second, they
> seem
> more angry.  Observe: "pitch" neutral term; "bitch" very bad word.
> "Pad" a
> thing; "bad" self-explanatory.  "Tie" around your neck; "die" death!
> "Call"
> something you do; "gall" an angry emotion!  Or the first part of a
> bladder
> that's going to be a lot of trouble for me when I hit fifty.  "Chin"
> part of
> the body; "gin", one of the Demon Alcohol's minions.  Then there's
> "pour" and
> "boar", the former being a gentle verb, the latter being a wild pig (or
> a
> tiresome person or something a drill does into your skin).  And, who
> could
> forget this example: "pious", someone who doesn't bother anyone, and
> "bias",
> the root of all evil.
>     Who can dispute such incontrovertible evidence?  Thus, voiced stops
> are
> indeed harder than voiceless stops.  Case closed.

He he... I'll answer with only two examples from French: "bal", a nice party
with dancing (or even "balle", a nice round bouncing thing :)) ), and "pal", a
delicacy among amateurs of torture (Prince Vlad was well known to be an amateur
of this kind of show :) ), and "jarre", a nice-looking bottle, often looked for
by collectioner, and "char", a violent, metallic, ugly war vehicle. Now dare
say that voiced consonnants are harder than voiceless... :))))))))


Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.