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

Dennis Paul Himes:
> Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> 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".
>
>     As another data point, my idiolect agrees with Nik's on "ing".  For me
> "sing" is definitely /siN/.  It's not that /IN/ sounds weird or unEnglish --
> I can pronounce /sIN/ easily enough -- it's just that /IN/ doesn't appear in
> any English words that I can think of.
Can _seeing_ be monosyllabic for you? If so, is it homophonous with _sing_?
Is _sink_ also /si:Nk/, or is it /sINk/ (as it is for the rest of the
world)?

--And.