Re: troubles with IPA vowels (was: Leute)

On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 09:05:45 +1000, Tristan Mc Leay <kesuari@...>
wrote:

>Roger Mills wrote:
>
>>And yet two more systems, which I've seen mainly in British publications--
>>
>>--One uses the correct IPA symbols:
>>/i/ the tense high vowel
>>/small cap I/ lax high vowel
>>/e/ tense mid vowel
>>/epsilon/ lax mid vowel
>>etc.
>>(Essentially the same as using X-SAMPA i, I, e, E)
>>
>>--The other uses the IPA length sign [:] for the tense vowels:
>>/i:/ high tense front
>>/i/ high lax front
>>/e:/
>>/e/
>>etc.
>>
>>All systems use /æ/ (ash, &) for the low front vowel, and /a/ for the low
>>central/back vowel even though it varies [a]~[6]~[A], but run into trouble
>>with the [o] and [O] sounds--
>>Amer. /ow/ Brit. /o:/ for the tense vowel of "boat, so"-- but IIRC there
>>is no Amer. counterpart */o/ (Brit. may use that for their "pot, caught"
>>but what about "law, saw"? since lax V aren't supposed to occur in CV
>>monosyllables...?)
>
>Typically I think the law-vowel (normally /O:/) is considered the tense
>counterpart of the hot-vowel (/O/ or /Q/; perscriptivists generally
>prefer [O]). The vowels in 'pot' and 'caught' are different; the former
>is the hot-vowel, the latter is the law-vowel.
What do you mean by 'tense' and 'lax'? Is it a phonetic feature (e.g. the
mysterious articulatory force, or jaw opening), or is it just a
distributional opposition (which would be better described as 'free' vs.
'checked'), or is it another way of referring to close-mid vs. open-mid vowels?

>I am also excluding antipodean varieties because it seems to be the
>fashion of the day.
And I thought you'd just been describing the varieties of your antipodes! :)

g_0ry@_ˆs:
j. 'mach' wust