🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <1992Oct31.162453.23536@midway.uchicago.edu>, by goer@ellis.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz):
> 
> I've always love the terms "extrametrical" and "extrasyllabic."  Let me
> translate:  We don't know what the hell to do with them, but we'll tack
> them on somehow or other.  What I'd like to know is whether the extramet-
> rical objects are rigidly defined by the system, so that their presence
> is predictable and systematically accounted for. 
> -- 
> 
>    -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
>    goer@midway.uchicago.edu          rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer

I don't think  that any one  system is agreeded upon.  People seem
to take what they like  from theories and then expand on them.
Since Linguistics is a young pseudo-science it seems best.

English is a good example of consistent use of extrametricality.
Metrical theory provides parameters which signal how the process works.
For example, the  English stress system makes the final consonant  
extrametrical.   Also, in nouns, the final syllable is extrametrical.
So, when the  extrametrical parameter is set, these things  are 
supposed to be consistent.  As for the syllable, as far  as I know there
is no systematic approach, or  consistently anyways, which claims
that this is extrasyllabic and that ain't.  


-- 
			     David Hahn
 		   University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
		         hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu