Re: Pronouncing Tokana (was RE: Importance of stress)

[note: I have "fixed" the attribution at the top, as it looked somewhat
like David had been wrongfully accused of saying something that I'd said]

On 27 Jan 00, at 11:38, Matt Pearson wrote:
> Paul Bennett wrote:
> >I don't recall if the following is even vaguely close to what Matt
> >intended, but I say (I *think*), in a fairly close x-sampa:
> >
> >WARNING: This is my first attempt at closer-than-normal transcription!
> >
> >/t_d_hoU_^<M>"k_hA:\<ML>.n6<L>/
>
> I'm afraid I can't begin to decipher that.
In other words:

Syllable 1: t{dental}{aspirated} o U{asyllabic}{mid-tone}

Syllable 2: {primary-stress} k{aspirated} A{half-long}{mid-falling-tone}

{syllable-break}

Syllable 3: n {lowered-@}{low-tone}

> "Tokana" is pronounced with
> stress on the penultimate syllable.  The /t/ and /k/ are both unaspirated,
> and thus often sound voiced to an English speaker's ear (e.g. my boyfriend
> imitates my pronunciation by calling it "Dogana").  As for the vowels,
> the /o/ is a short back rounded lax mid-vowel, similar to the "au" in
> "caught" (for those speakers who distinguish "caught" from "cot"), or
> else like the "o" in "sort".  The /a/ is as in "father".  There is
> no appreciable difference in length or quality between the stressed
> /a/ in the second syllable and the unstressed /a/ in the final syllable.
>
Okeydokey, that means I'll now pronounce it:

/t_dQ<M>"kA<ML>.nA<L>/

Which is a heck of a lot easier to read, don't you think!  I automatically
give it a fairly dental (/_d/) "t", ISTR something about this from your
webpage?

If not, then that's the way it feels most natural to me.  The /n/ is backed
from dental to alveolar thanks to the preceeding /k/.  Heck, don't ask me
why, it's almost entirely instinctival...


---
Pb