USAGE: Permissable /IN/ (was: [i:]=[ij]?)
|From:||Kristian Jensen <kljensen@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, November 2, 2000, 14:34|
Roger Mills wrote:
>>On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Nik Taylor wrote:
>>> */IN/ is illegal in my idiolect.
>>Then how do you pronounce "thing"?>
>Permissible pontification: (?) there is no tense/lax contrast in English
>before /N/ or /r/ (at least in monosyllables). The vowel is neither [i] nor
>[I], but somewhere in-between-- usually closer to [I] I think (it is for
Actually, /IN/ is quite permissable in English, and I suspect in Nik's
dialect as well. The thing is, /I/ is raised so that it resembles [i].
Hence, the lack of the tense/lax contrast before /N/ that Roger pointed
out. *BUT*... there is still a length contrast so that one can still
phonologically speak of a contrast between /IN/ and /iN/.