Re: EPT:representing back unrounded vowels in X-Sampa

Quoting Joe <joe@...>:

> Andreas Johansson wrote:
>
> >Quoting Joe <joe@...>:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Tristan McLeay wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Sun, 18 Jan 2004, Joe wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>But it's not [6].  I say this after years of experience living around
> >>>>RP-speakers.  It's more closed than that.  However, when I round it, I
> >>>>don't get [o], so I'm thinking it's probably [3].
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>So whats in 'bird'? I thought it was [3:] in RP?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>It is.  Length contrast, I think.  The only other vowel that does that
> >>is [E] vs [E:](minimal pair - 'cairn'[kE:n] vs 'ken'[kEn]).
> >>
> >
> >'Cairn' is [kE:n] in modern RP? My school textbooks indicated it as [ke@n],
> >and I usually say [kE@n] (I also have [e@] for the vowel in 'ear', which my
> >texbooks indicated as [I@]).
> >
>
> Well, 'tis in my ideolect.  [E@] and [e@] sound old-fashioned, to my
> ear.  To me, |air| is [E:], and it's definitely a pure vowel.  In a
> similar way, I think 'year' is probably [yI@] as of yet, but it's
> definitely heading towards [yI:].
You mean [jI@] and [jI:], no doubt.

Well, I guess I can live with sounding old-fashioned. To get a good accent (as
opposed to a functional one), I'd have to go live in an English-speaking place
for a while, and then I'd surely pick up a lot of unhelpful localisms instead.

                                                          Andreas

Reply