Tristan wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 23:04 -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > On 12/7/05, Roger Mills <rfmilly@...> wrote:
> > There's also "reversed epsilon" (CXS [3]) which I at least
> > modify with
> > circumflex (IPA hook) for the retroflexed _stressed_ vowel of
> > bird, hurt et
> > al. [3^]. But I'm not sure this is proper CXS. Your [r\=] gets
> > the point
> > across too.
> >
> > I thought the CXS for rhotic hook was `, not ^?
>
> Yes, that's true. ` is a rhotic hook on vowels and a retroflexion
> diacritic on consonants. I can't think of what ^ means though
You're right. It could be I was thinking of X-Sampa, plain Sampa or even
Kirshenbaum, but I know I've seen it used....and it does look quite like the
hook in IPA.
> > Not IMD; "bird" and "encumbered" and "burred" are a three-way perfect
> > rhyme. But that way lies YAEPT.
>
> I don't mean to take you up on the YAEPT, but I am slightly curious---is
> it really a perfect rhyme, and the difference in stress doesn't get in
> the way? I thought most dialects had the last syllable of "encumbered"
> unstressed, and rhyming is usually considered to occur from the last
> stressed syllable unwards---thus "encumbered" can normally only rhyme
> with two-or-more syllable words.
Agree on that; false rhyme at best.
>
> (At this point, Roger wrote and Mark snipped:)
> > > One advantage of this system is
> > > that for non-rhotic dialects, you simply drop the diacritic ^.
>
> Not quite true---most transcriptions of non-rhotic dialects mark length,
> whereas American English at least is typically written without length
> marked, thus /3`/ -> /3:/ and /@`/ -> /@/.
You are correct again.
Still, in the normal way of
> writing RP you can always work out from the symbols whether a length
> mark should follow or not. (One common way of writing Australian English
> doesn't mark length used by frex. the Macquarie Dictionary; it strikes
> me as pretty silly because then the only phonetic difference
> between /fVs/=[fa_"s] and /fAs/=[fa_":s] is not even mentioned.)
>
Umm, what words are these? fuss and farce?