USAGE: Adrian's vowel disorder (was: RE: [i:]=[ij]?)
|From:||Adrian Morgan <morg0072@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, November 5, 2000, 5:00|
> If you like you can send me a cassette of your vowels
> (Dept of Cultural Studies, University of Central
> Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE, UK) & I'll have a listen.
Right now I'm quite busy studying for exams ... which I have
on the 17th, 23rd and 24th.
> On a broad transcription [u] seems the best symbolization
> for both vowels _fool_ and _foot_ in Aus E.
> But I think the _foot_ vowel is a little lower than
> cardinal [u].
Lips not as tight, mouth feels more spacious.
What I can't wrap my head around is that the British
(presumably RP) /u/, as in _to_, sounds the same as my own
AFAICT, so why did Kristen's textbook have it as [u], when
the vowel in _took_ is a totally dissimilar sound?
> Unfortunately I don't think you can get a true minimal
> pair for these sounds, because to get the _fool_ vowel the
> /l/ has to be there.
Only exception is the _ooh_ in, "ooh, that's nice!"
> If for you the _full_ vowel is the same as the _foot_
> vowel, then _full_/_fool_ could be a minimal pair.
> > /u/
> If for you it's definitely not a diphthong, then mymoney'd
> be on _moon_ having [u-], barred-u, central high round.
I find it very hard to grasp the idea of IPA vowels with
diacritics being totally unlike the base vowels (i.e.