|From:||Daniel Prohaska <daniel@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, May 15, 2008, 14:02|
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 2:27 PM
"Now that's pretty important a distinction in meaning to place on vowel
length and a glottal stop!"
It is, and it works, because in Northern Regional (Standard) English vowel
length is distinctive and [?] is an allophone of /t/.
"I guess in accents like Tristan's the distinction is between [kEn] and
[kA:n], which is a bit more audible for us poor bastards without a /?/
phoneme in our L1's! (I do have [?] in some cases -- notably when trying to
pronounce a word-final stressed short vowel, as when pronouncing the
'adverb' /la/ in isolation it becomes [la?]. Another possible
pronunciationis [la:], which is still different from _la(de)_ /lA:/ [lQ:] --
an impossible distinction in many accents of Swedish."
Daniel Prohaska skrev:
> In my North-Western English English <can't> is [ka:n?] or [ka:~?],
> definitely with a glottal stop at the end. In other contexts I've got
> similar assimilations to the one Tristan described for Australian
> "I can't always" [a"ka:~?'O:L\8z] or [a"ka:~?'O:wEz]
> "can't you come" ["ka:~tS@'kUm]
> <can> is [kan].