Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

/E~/ (was: Re: Kyrgyz was Re: Zetowvu / Ezotwuv (new conlang))

From:Daniel Andreasson Vpc-Work <daniel.andreasson@...>
Date:Wednesday, February 26, 2003, 14:43
Christophe wrote:

> I wouldn't know. But "in" is *definitely* [E~] and doesn't go any lower than > that (anything lower sounds like /a~/ to me).
You know what I think it is? I think it's the Swedish vowels that are a bit screwed up. I can assure you that you wouldn't complain about my pronunciation if you heard it (well, perhaps you would, but my vowels wouldn't make you throw up). My French-speaking cousins don't. The Italian |e| in IPA is /E/, but to me it sounds more like something in between /E/ and /&/. Swedish /E/ as in |älg| is definitely more close than Italian. And the English /E/ in |pet| is most often written /e/ in IPA, but it's much more close to Sw. /E/ than Sw. /e/. If I pronounce French /E~/ without nasalization, it sounds just like Italian /E/ (like in |bellezza|). So, in conclusion, I think the IPA system is screwing us over. Swedish /E/ (or /&/) ain't the same as French /E~/. I pronounce it correctly, but the IPA is fooling me. Thanks for the input. And thanks to John Cowan for the comments on /E/ and /&/. That made it a bit clearer in my head. (If I don't make much sense, I think John's post might make much more sense.) If my explanation above seems wrong, please tell me, and I won't utter another word of French for the rest of my life. I wouldn't wanna make a mockery of the French we've all learned to love. Daniel Andreasson


Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>