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

Nik Taylor wrote:

>Kristian Jensen wrote:
>> 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].
>
>It's *identical* to /i/.  I can find no difference between the vowels in
>"seen" and "sing".
But isn't there a length difference? Phonemic /i/ for me is [i:], and
it sounds completely wrong to say [si:N] for "sing". Its more correct
sounding for me if its pronounced as [siN]. The vowel in "sing" [siN]
is still /I/ by nature of it being short even though it is raised to
[i] before /N/.

-kristian- 8)