Print

Print


On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:57:43 +0100, Christian Thalmann <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>--- In conlang@y..., Roger Mills <romilly@E...> wrote:
[...]
>> (2) why is "so" /zo/ written {dho} but "aussieht" is written with
>> {-ss-}?
>
>With {-thth-}, you mean.  There's no inconsistency there.
>
>> Isn't it [aws.'zi:t]? I could be wrong, Lord knows...
>
>I should say so.  I've never hear anything else than ["aws.,si:t]
>(using the new C-SAMPA convention of /,/ as secondary stress =).
>Without the prefix, it would indeed be [zi:t].

Interesting. Do you distinguish {ausw<...>} (e. g. in _Ausweiß_) from
{ausf<...>} (as e. g. in _ausfallen_)?

(I was taught that the second spirant must be voiceless in both, but
still different in tenseness; and I am curious if _aussieht_ is closer
to the former or the latter, in terms of that distinction)


Basilius