Re: troubles with IPA vowels (was: Leute)

--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, "J. 'Mach' Wust" <j_mach_wust@Y...> wrote:

> I'd say (northern) German and English (RP or GA) have [aI], French has
> sometimes [Aj] (not as a diphthong), but Züritüütsch has [&i].
[&i] sounds positively Dutch.  Modern French no longer has
[A].



> You'd phonetically spell Züritüütsch words like _Räägel_ (from the name
> Regula) or _fääze_ (to rain very few) with [a:]? That's unusual, but
well,
> the phonetic transcription is not as strict as we'd wish. To me,
they'd be
> [r&:gl, f&:ts@].
Man, you truly are from another planet.  =P

My aunt Regula is called "Rägi" ['ragi].  Shy raining is
"nisle" ['nisl@] or "fiserle" ['fis@rl@].



> The sound is quite the same as the one in
> English _pet, bed_ (quite different from both standard German or
French /e/
> and /E/), and so the problem of it's representation is the same as well:
> Some'd represent it with [e], others with [E].
I've never seen anyone represent English "pet, bed" with
[e].  What's the weather like on your planet?  ;-)



> >Is the distinction between [y Y] and [u U] phonemic in
> >Bärndütsch too?  I thought only [i I] were distinguished
> >in writing, anyway.
>
> /hYt:/ 'today' vs. /hyt:/ 'skins', /Sut:/ 'kick' vs. /SUt:/ 'rubble'. In
> writing, /u, y/ might be marked with a dot below, according to Marti.
Ah, thanks.  I wish I finally had a minimal pair for the
/E/ vs /a/ distinction in Züritüütsch.



-- Christian Thalmann

Reply