Peter Constable wrote:
> On 10/23/2001 08:57:53 PM Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> [...] But the definition you've given here for
> "featural" is also somewhat different from that which Daniels
> used in application to Hangul: if I recall, it was the
> metaphoric similarity between the graphic shape and the shape
> of articulators / point of articulation that led him to call
> Hangul a featural system. That is a rather narrower
> definition that what you are using.
This is also my understanding: that "featural" refers to a relationship
between the *shape* of the signs and some physical characteristics of the
*sounds* they represent.
In this sense, could it be said that the tones in Mandarin Pinyin are
"featural"? The shape of the accents is a rough depiction of the tonal
curve.
Although I haven't followed this discussion very carefully, I think that all
the buzz is about the precise meaning of terms coined by Peter T. Daniels
and William Bright. As both scholars are members of the Qalam Mailing List
(qalam@yahoogroups.com), why not sending a short resume of the discussion
there?
_ Marco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Oct 24 2001 - 09:51:25 EDT