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.
I didn't even thing about rapid speech. After about 10 seconds of
experimentation, I still pronounce those as two syllables, although as
Roger stated the /N/ -> /n/. There's also just a touch of /j/: /bi.jIn/.

I've never actually sat down and analyzed my idiolect, but I'd be
interested to do so (if I ever had time ;). My accent is relatively
neutral, as I grew up in northern Virginia, just outside the Beltway.
Living in Nashville for the past six years has altered my pronunciation
of certain words a little. My pronunciation of the suffix -ville has
degenerated into simply /vl/, and if I ever need to refer to Louisville,
KY, it's even worse: /lu.w@.vl/. That schwa is about as short as is
humanly possible to make.

I'll have to think about my pronunciation more now.

--
Daniel Seriff
microtonal@sericap.com
http://members.tripod.com/microtonal

Si iterum insanum me appelles, oculum alterum tuum edem.
Wenn du mich nochmal verrückt nennst, werde ich deine andere Auge essen.