Re: Cloakroom

-----Original Message-----
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/.

Dan



"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
English.

 > "I can't always" [a"ka:~?'O:L\8z] or  [a"ka:~?'O:wEz]

 > "can't you come" ["ka:~tS@'kUm]

 > <can> is [kan].

 > Dan

Reply