INTERLNG Archives

Discussiones in Interlingua

INTERLNG@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Discussiones in Interlingua <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Academia pro Interlingua <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:47:25 +0100
Reply-To:
Discussiones in Interlingua <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<F266C92979E541C0A2D4F2294209B803@BentPC>
Subject:
From:
Bent Andersen <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
· ingranage [iŋ.gra.na.dʒe] · sub

Car Josu,

Io dubita que il es juste indicar iste transcription como "le" (sol)
correcte.

Il es ver que "ng" usualmente se assimila a [ŋg] in parolas como:
    finger, pinger, tanger, longe, larynge, extinguer etc.

Ma facer tal assimilation in parolas composite, p.ex. con in- pare a me - e
io crede a scandinavos generalmente - extrememente innatural. Pro nos pare
"correcte" que "ng" remane n+g in parolas como:
    ingranage,  ingrate, inglutir, ingypsar, non(-)gummate, ben(-)gustante

Simile cosa con "nc":
    [ŋk] in banco, trunco
    ma [nk] in incorporar, inculte, non(-)conforme, ben(-)cocite

Mi sentimento es que in le spirito de IALA rigiditate exaggerate non es
desirabile in tal cosas.
    In altere parolas: Si alcuno dice iŋgranage io lo acceptarea sin
reguardar lo como erronee.
    Ma in(-)granage anque non es erronee,  e pro me mesmo es absolutemente
le plus natural e preferibile.

Bent


--
Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2