Re: USAGE: Kristian on Adrian's vowel disorder (was: RE: [i:]=[ij]?)

> > > > I need to hear my Brisbane pals again. I suspect
> > > > your [w:] is really [u-:]. If /l/ has that effect of
> > > > erasing the [y] glide of long /u/, then [u-y]
becomes
> > > > [u-:] before /l/.
> > >
> > > I agree.
> >
> > Hereby totally contradicting And's previous post where
he
> > suggested that /u/ in _moon_ might be [u-].
>
> For *you* who says it monophthongally.
Well, it's the Queensland dialect discussed here, not the
New South Welsh one. And the friend I spoke to told me that
QLD pronunciation of _school_ is like the SA one (like
'could') rather than the NSW one ('moon').

Now, note Kristen's statement: "I suspect your [w:] is
really [u-:]". This [w:] refers to the SA pronunciation of
_school_ (like 'could'), which I had as [skw:l]. Whereas
your previous statement has [u-:] as a candidate for the
vowel in _moon_, which is the vowel in the *NSW*
pronunciation of _school_.

Which statement is right?

But then Kristen says, "If /l/ has that effect of erasing
the [y] glide of long /u/, then [u-y] becomes [u-:] before
/l/". Now, I've never heard any Australian pronounce _moon_
with a diphthong (unless maybe to insert a transitional
schwa), but let's take this as read and see where it leads
us.

If [u-] was my [w] (Kristen's statement), then this would
make the Queensland pronunciation of _moon_ sound like
'mwoon', or _skoot_ like 'squoot'.

If [u-] was my [y] (And's statement), then this would make
the Queensland pronunciation of _school_ contain the vowel
in _moon_, but according to my friend it, like the SA
pronunciation, doesn't.

The assertions are mutually exclusive.