Re: Lax counterpart of [&]?
|From:||M. Astrand <ysimiss@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 16:25|
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:55:52 +0100
From: Jonathan Knibb <j_knibb@...>
Subject: Re: Lax counterpart of [&]?
>> Generally, most foreigner's /&/es sound more [E]ey. Possibly the RP
>> /&/ is a bit more similar to [a], though definitly not identical.
>On the subject of /&/, I have terrible trouble distinguishing all
>three of Finnish 'a', 'ä' (a-umlaut) and 'e' at the same time
>articulatorily, and auditorily particularly the latter two.
>The books I've read tend to imply that I shouldn't have this problem,
>as my Southern British English 'part' [A:], 'pat' [&] and 'pet' [E]
>should model the Finnish vowels well enough (length notwithstanding)
>... but for some reason I can't make this work. My best guess is that
>the Finnish a-umlaut actually falls somewhere between my /&/ and /E/.
>Can anyone clarify?
Santeri Junttila on the Uraliconlang mailing list ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uraliconlang/
) perhaps could. He is the Well of Wisdom about Uralic languages. ;)
I can only say that myself I can hear [E] as as well /e/ as /&/.
>[reply to jonathan underscore knibb at hotmail dot com]
>'O dear white children casual as birds,
>Playing among the ruined languages...'
>Auden/Britten, 'Hymn to St. Cecilia'
- M. Astrand
"Neeba." - "Teeba?" - "Qeesvefar la:lka." - "Djo:ly."
"Guess what?" - "What?" - "I've learned how to speak." - "Great."
Kuukausimaksuton nettiyhteys: http://www.suomi24.fi/liittyma/
Yli 12000 logoa ja soittoääntä: http://sms.suomi24.fi/