Metrical Phonology Puns

I'm reading Hyman and Plank's (2018) Phonological Typology, and I found some passage:

> phonology is no longer the unified subfield that it once was

>it is becoming harder for phonologists to talk to each other, for who can be a computer scientist, phonetician, neurolinguist and expert in adjacent fields such as morphology and syntax at the same time as having a command of the extensive literature on phonology-internal argumentation and phonological typology?

And my teacher also said that it is not really any "camps" in phonology like what is in syntax, because the field is too fragmented, with no central framework(s). And I may be wrong but it seems like in Syntax not very much people are expected to be well-verse in more than one Syntax theory, but many Phonology curriculum expect the student coming out knowing at least Rule-based phonology, OT, and Autosegmental phonology (and may be also Feature Geometry and Metrical phonology).

What do you think? Is phonology any more fragmented than other linguistic discipline like syntax, morphology, etc.? Is there any attempt to unify the field again (perhaps like when Newmeyer tried to bridge between formalist and functionalist)?

Sorry in advance for the overly long post probably only of interest to me.

I am a long time devoted reader of LotR, Hobbit, Silmarillion (I read it on release) and most of HoME. Also, I am a devoted follower of Corey Olsen's Exploring LotR a podcast that goes through the book at the rate of a paragraph or so a week analyzing each word and scene in great detail. Currently it is over 200+ episodes in and just starting The Ring Goes South.

Each year I try and mostly succeed in listening to the full LotR. I have just gotten to Moria on this years read.

It occurred to me as I was listening that there are two ways to read LotR.

1) The first is as a wonderful and sweeping saga full of amazing characters and fascinating stories.  The use of language, the poems and the depth of the saga is amazing.   In this way of reading, everything one reads can be taken at face value or as it fits into LotR.  Two examples: 

	a. At the Council, when Bilbo offers to take the Ring to Mordor, it is a wonderful offer totally self sacrificial with no overtones of his desire to have the Ring back

	b. Glorfindel is a majestic character.  One of the great Elves who have lived in the blessed realm.  He is not Glorfindel who saved Elrond's father, killed a Balrog and was sent back from death.

This way of reading is full of wonder, enjoyable and totally satisfying

2) A second way to read LotR is as part of the Tolkien legendarium.  In this way of reading every part of LotR is a piece of history subject to detailed analysis both internally and as part of the larger history.  In this way of reading, there are gems upon gems to be found.  There are also inconsistencies or questions that need explaining.  The tale is epic but in exploring the minutia some of the grandeur and sweep of the book is lost.

I do not judge which is correct option 1 or 2. I think both are wonderful ways to experience the books.

You can quit this post now, but:

To show my true geekdom and to be honest, I will point out that Tolkien recognized the two ways of reading his works and as usual said it better than I. The following from the prologue to Unfinished Tales:

I now wish that no appendices had been promised! For I think their appearance in truncated and compressed form will satisfy nobody: certainly not me; clearly from the (appalling mass of ) letters I receive not those people who like that kind of thing – astonishingly many; while those who enjoy the book as

I saw this meme that said,

"No zoomy-zoom on the slicky-slick or you go boomy-boom in the ditchy-ditch and have to wait for a towy-tow in the cold snowy-snow."

The meme itself doesn't matter at all, but I'm curious about the linguistic qualities of the form "(root word)y-(root word). I've definitely heard similar forms of words though I can't put my finger on exactly when or what context. It's kind of just when people are joking around, and is slightly different than baby talk.

Is there a name for this or any sort of "rules"? In the example it is using both verbs and nouns, but not adjectives. For example, "softy-soft" and "loudy-loud" don't sound "right."

It's such a silly form of speech, I know, but I'm interested if there is actually any documentation or research into it.

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.

Do your worst!

I'm surprised it hasn't decade.

For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.

I said "hey look, an escaPEA"

No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!

Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂

It really does, I swear!

Last September, I had some musings on what an oral language that didn't use the tongue might be like, which basically came down to counting out how many phones there are in the IPA that don't involve the tongue as an articulator. But, a phonology is much more than just a list of sounds, and how the limited pallet of sounds available to a tongueless speaker might combine into a phonological system is an interesting question.

So, here's some more musing along those lines.

Many of the sounds available are very similar to each other, and not commonly contrasted in natural languages--things like β vs. v. And as far as I know, there are no languages that contrast, e.g., all four of β, v, ⱱ, and ʋ. So in practice, the total number of phonemes available
will be somewhat reduced. In particular, I am hesitant to contrast bilabials with labiodentals at all. But, we can keep around some extra sounds as allophones to help support the differentiation of other sounds around them.

So, here is my phoneme list:

Front Sounds:
Plosives: b p p'
Affricates: bv pf
Fricatives: v f ~ β ɸ
Nasals: m ~ ɱ
Approximants: w ~ ʋ

(~ indicates allophones)

Back sounds:
ʢ ʜ (epiglottal trills)
ʡʼ (epiglottal ejective)
ʔ
h

This paired down list is based on things which I personally can articulate and distinguish relatively easily, so it may be a little conservative--but even so, we end up with a total of 14 consonant phonemes (I was tempted to put in the bilabial trill and flap as well, but I have issues with producing those consistently, this is a proof of concept, and we don't actually need them!) Hawai'ian gets by with 8, so there is still plenty of room to play here.

Additionally, I think we can throw in a few simple clusters:

/bw/ [bʋ] /pw/ [pʋ]
/bvw/ [bβʋ] /pfw/ [pɸʋ]
/vw/ [vw] /fw/ [fw]
/vm/ [vɱ] /fm/ [fɱ]

/ʢw/ [ʢw] /ʜw/ [ʜw]
/hw/ [hw] ~ [ʍ]

Note that allophony in the fricatives and approximant helps to support the distinct characteristics of a /vw/ vs /bvw/ cluster, etc.

In the vowel space, we're basically restricted to rounded and unrounded, which I will label /o/ and /a/. All other vowel qualities depend on being able to alter the resonant space by positioning the tongue.

Now, to further ensure maximum distinctiveness, lets go ahead and disallow the rounded vowel after /w/--that way, we will never confuse a w-final cluster with a sequence of non-w-consonant and
quickly-articulated /o/. That reduces our potential

They’re on standbi

Because she wanted to see the task manager.

Pilot on me!!

Nothing, he was gladiator.

Dad jokes are supposed to be jokes you can tell a kid and they will understand it and find it funny.

This sub is mostly just NSFW puns now.

If it needs a NSFW tag it's not a dad joke. There should just be a NSFW puns subreddit for that.

Edit* I'm not replying any longer and turning off notifications but to all those that say "no one cares", there sure are a lot of you arguing about it. Maybe I'm wrong but you people don't need to be rude about it. If you really don't care, don't comment.

What did 0 say to 8 ?

" Nice Belt "

So What did 3 say to 8 ?

" Hey, you two stop making out "

When I got home, they were still there.

I won't be doing that today!

[Removed]

Where ever you left it 🤷‍♀️🤭

This morning, my 4 year old daughter.

Daughter: I'm hungry

Me: nerves building, smile widening

Me: Hi hungry, I'm dad.

She had no idea what was going on but I finally did it.

Thank you all for listening.

You take away their little brooms

It was about a weak back.

Why

It’s pronounced “Noel.”

After all his first name is No-vac

What, then, is Chinese rap?

Edit:

Notable mentions from the comments:

• Spanish/Swedish/Swiss/Serbian hits

• French/Finnish art

• Country/Canadian rap

• Chinese/Country/Canadian rock

• Turkish/Tunisian/Taiwanese rap

There hasn't been a single post this year!

(Happy 2022 from New Zealand)

Nothing, it just waved

Him: I can explain everything!

(It's his best joke yet I think)

There hasn't been a post all year!