0904_9-10월 2회 모고_intrusive/r/_partitive NPs

#A6 /n/ Assimilation + /æ/ diphthongization

In the pseech of English speakers there is an allophonic rule whereby the phoneme /æ/ is diphthongized to [æɨ]. The effects of the rule can be seen such as the following:        In the same dialect there is an optional rule of /n/ assimilation. These data in (2) are the effects of /n/ assimilation rule as given below: (3) /n/ assimilation rule:        Assimilate /n/ in _______ of articulation to a following consonant. Now assess the implications of the folllowing forms for the relative ordering of /æ/ diphthongization and /n/ assimilation.

(1) /pæŋ/ /fæŋ/ /æŋɡɚ/ : phoneme 때부터 æ+ŋ 이면 æ diphthongization일어난다. ㅊ (4) pancake ┗ allophone을 봤을 때 /n/assimilation이 일어나 [pæŋ-]  이지만 diphthongized 는 안 됨!  ┗ 만약 /n/assimilation이 먼저 일어났다면, /æ/ diphongization(=raising) 은 자연스럽게 일어났을거임 ┗BUT! /æ/ diphthongization 먼저 일어나면 [pænkeɪk]는 그대로죠? > [pænkeɪk]에서 place assimilation만 일어나서 [ pæ ŋ keɪk ]으로 변하고 끝나죠? ┗따.라.서. /æ/ diphthongization ➜  /n/assimilation  순서로 규칙이 적용되는거임.

---

#B5 Grammar

With regard to the NP-internal elements between which we may find instances of agreement, there are two main types of NP in English : simple NPs and partitive NPs. (1) a. most students      b. all students. (2) a. most of the students       b. all of the students As in (2), the partitive phrases have a quantifier followed by an of-phrase, designating a set with respect to which certain individuals are quantified. In terms of semantics, these partitive NPs are different from simple NPs in several respects.          First, the lower NP in partitive phrases must be definite; and in the of-phrase, no quantificational NP is allowed, as shown in (3). (3) each student vs. *each of __ students            Second, not all determiners with quantificational force can appear in partitive constructions. As shown in (4), determiners such as the,every, and no cannot occupy the first position:   (4) a. *the of the students vs. the students      b. *every of this ideas vs. every idea         Finally, simple NPs and partitive NPs have different restrictions relative to the semantic head. (5) a. She doesn't believe much of that story       b. I read some of the book. (6) a. *She doesn't believe much story.      b.  *I read some book. The partitive constructions in (5) allow a mass(non-count) quantifier such as much, some, etc. to cooccur with a lower of-NP containing a singular count noun. But as we can see in (6), the same elements serving as determiners cannot directly precede such nouns.

Partitive phrase ┗ (2) a. most of the students ┗ quantifier(most) followed by an of-phrase ┗ certain individuals are quantified ┗ 특정의 무언가가 수량화 됨. Partitive NPs의 특징 1. lower NP must be definite ┗ most of the students 2. of-phrase에서 quantificational NP만 존재가능. ┗ *each of students ┗ (students가 quantificational NP 아니라 비문) 근데, quantificational determiners: every, the ,no 같은 애들은 문장 시작 자리에 못 와. ┗ *every of this ideas different 제한관계? (5) partitive는 셀 수 있는 명사(story)와 셀 수 없는 명사 quantifier(much, some)이 cooccur할 수 있다. (6) much, some에 determiner로 사용되는 경우에는 cannot directly precede such nouns.

Identify TWO ungradmmatical phrases or sentences in <B>, and then explain why, ONLY based on the description in <A>. (a) neither cars - simple NPs (b) neither of the cars - partitive/ lower NP is definite (c) some of many problems - partitive/definitex/quantificational NP (d) One of the people was dying of thirst. - partitive/ definite o (e) Many of the people were dying of thirst. - partitive/definite (f) We listened to as little speech as possible - partitive/

(c) is ungrammatical. The lower NP in partitive phrases must be definite; and in the of-prase, no quantificational NP 'many problems' is alllowed. (f) is ungrammatical. The mass (non-count) quantifier 'little' serinving as a determiner cannot directly precede a singular count noun 'speech'

 

---

 

#B6 : intrusive /r/

nonrhotic accents such as received pronunciation have a phonotactic constraint whereby /r/ can occur in syllable onsets but not in rhymes. Such accents have retained some residue of historic rhyme - /r/ in the form of the centring diphthong phonemes /ɪe/ /ɛə/ and /ʊə/, but in other vowles no such traces of historic /r/ are left.  In such accents, then, /r/ ocurs only ina syllable onset: it failis to occur in hear /hɪə/ but it is present in hearing /hɪərɪŋ/.  (1)a. hammer [hæmə]   bar [bɑ]   hear [hɪə]   cure [kjʊə]  tear [tɛə]  fur [fɜ]         b. hammering   barring   hearing   curing     tearing      fury         /hamərɪŋ /     /bɑrɪŋ /   /hɪərɪŋ/  /kjʊərɪŋ/   /tɛərɪŋ /   /fɜrɪ/      c. hammer it      bar it      hear it      cure it      tear it      fur is        /hamərɪt /      /bɑrɪt/      /hɪərɪt/    /kjʊərɪt/    /tɛərɪt /     /fɜrɪz/ Example (1a) shows the range of vowel phonemes that are found in contexts of historic /r/. Example (1b) demonstrates the occurrence of /r/  in RP in words that are morphologically related to those in (1a). In these cases /r/ is in the ________ position and is therefore not barred from occurring.              What is of interest here is the list of items in (1c), where /r/, although word-final, does occur in the context of the following word beginning with a vowel. This is the phenomenon of 'linking /r/', common in nonrhotic accents including the most formal variety of RP.  ........ With regard to /r/, liaison has the same effect as the regularities of word-internal syllabification do: just as in hammering,the /r/ in hammer it occupies the syllable-_________ position in connected speech and is therefore pronounced in the speech of nonrhotic speakers. 어쩌고 저쩌고.......

그러니까 (1b,c)는 occurrence of /r/가 있는 case인거야. 근데 언제 occur? when /r/ is in the syllable onset일 때.

Based on the passage, fill in the blank with ONE word from the passage. Second, considering (2), state the environment where intrusive /r/ does not occur using the distinctive feature of the vowels.

Intrusive /r/ does not occur when it is preceded by vowels or second elemtns of diphthongs which are [+high]