Re: THEORY: [i:]=[ij]? (was Re: Pronouncing "Boreanesia")
| From: | Eric Christopherson <raccoon@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, November 10, 2000, 5:23 |
|---|
On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 07:23:18PM -0500, Nik Taylor wrote:
> I just discovered today that, altho the vowel in "sang" has the same
> quality as, e.g., "sane" (yet, minus the offglide), it has the *length*
> of /&/, that is:
That might be true of my speech, too. I've thought about it being [eN]
before, but I thought it would be closer to [{] than that, say [E], but I
know it's not [E] (the vowel in <strength> is different from the one in
<sang>).
> sag = [s&g]
> sang = [seN]
> sane = [se:jn]
Here we differ -- I use exactly the same allophone of /{/ before /N/ as I do
before /g/, that is, probably [e] or something.
--
Eric Christopherson / *Aiworegs Ghristobhorosyo