Re: USAGE: Permissable /IN/ (was: [i:]=[ij]?)

Roger Mills wrote:
>Aha. I was going to ask for examples. Agreed that for some
>dialects/idiolects the norm for /i/ before /N/ may vary.  As for "being":
>I can envision "pedantic fast speech" e.g. 'you're being [bi:N] ridiculous',
>or similarly 'I'm seeing [si:N] her tonight'.  I call this pedantic, because
>in ordinary fast speech the N would > n.   So [i:N] or [iN] may be
>phonetically possible, but still not phonemically.  Also, as Dan Seriff
>pointed out, being, seeing etc. are 2 syllables-- also 2 morphemes-- so they
>don't really count.
The number of morphemes doesn't always equate with the number of syllables.
Take the morpheme "-s" for instance in "sees" or "bees". The morpheme "-s"
is subject to certain morphophonemic rules such that it's articulation
varies depending on the word it attaches to. Similarly, there could be some
kind of morphophonemic pattern going on with "-ing" after long-i. At least
that's what I thought because my normal allegro pronounciation of "being"
and "seeing" is [bi:N] and [si:N] respectively. Furthermore, its is not
"pedantic fast speech" for me because I never change [N] to [n] anyways,
even in fast speech.

Its times like these when I wish I could tell you guys what exactly my
English dialect is. English is indeed my mother-tongue. But I have never
lived in an English speaking country per se. I'm the product of a mixed
marriage, the language used within my family is English, and I was raised
in the Philippines where English was the language of the media, schooling,
business, and government. I also studied in an International School where
the language spoken there was what we called pseudo-Californian (whatever
that means).

Oh well...

-kristian- 8)