Re: THEORY: [i:]=[ij]? (was Re: Pronouncing "Boreanesia")

Roger Mills wrote:
> OK, this info makes me (and probably And) much happier. ;-))  So would you
> revise your earlier /sijN/ 'sing' same V as  /sijn/ 'seen' to contrastive
> [siN] vs. [si:jn]?
Nope.  In fact, I noticed the shortness of [seN] when I was contrasting
"sing" with "sang", I realized that "sang" had a much shorter vowel than
"sing", so I compared "sang" with "sane" and "sag".  So, [si:jN]-[seN]

> Your mention of people's impressionistic reactions to your "accent"--
> British, various European, and _especially_ S.African-- gives me a clue:  At
> least British and SA tend to be pronounced very much fronted, with
> considerably more muscular tension of lips/tongue etc.,-- S.African even
> more than British, to my ear (and admittedly limited exposure)-- compared to
> common American.
Hmm ... it could be.  I know that /i/ (and the other front vowels to
lesser extents) forces my mouth into a sort of smile, I'll have to look
for that when listening to other people.

> So perhaps you picked up just
> enough of that from your therapist that your speech is heard as somehow
> "different"...?
That could be.  Or it could be a form of hypercorrection in some cases.
If it is that there's more tension, perhaps my problem had been that I
pronounced things too "lax", and so overcompensated?  I wish I knew what
speech problems I had.  I only remember that "r" was the last problem to
be overcome.  I have vague memories of being taught how to say vowels in
front of "r".  Also, I used to say "lellow" instead of "yellow".

--
Dievas dave dantis; Dievas duos duonos
God gave teeth; God will give bread - Lithuanian proverb
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor