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
([email protected]), 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