Re: USAGE: Schwa and syllabification

Mark wrote:

<<A genuine [@l] sounds different from [l=], but is a bit harder to
pronounce IME.  The word "little" is phonemically /'lIt@l/, but the pair
(schwa + sonorant) usually gets reduced to a syllabic sonorant in
English, because it's easier to say.  When you pronounce [@l] at
anything close to normal speed, your mouth gets into position for the l
early on, while you've theoretically just begun pronouncing the schwa.
At full speed they collapse into a simultaneous articulation, and you get
[l=].>>

This is an excellent explanation   I'd add to that the way you can tell if 
you do it or not is to examine what's going on in your mouth (I don't think you 
need a mirror).   You'll notice that when you pronounce the "tt" in "hitting", 
your tongue goes up and touches the alveolar ridge (just behind your teeth).  
 You should notice the same with the "l" in "palace".   If you truly have a 
schwa in between the "tt" and "l" in "little", then there will be a time in 
between your tongue hitting the alveolar ridge for "tt" (which is [4]) and your 
tongue hitting the alveolar ridge for "l" where your tongue should *not* be 
touching the alveolar ridge.   In my case, there is no such time, so I obviously 
have a syllabic "l".   If you find that your tongue moves away from the 
alveolar ridge after you pronounce [4], then maybe you have a schwa before /l/ 
rather than a syllabic /l/.

-David

Replies