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

Adrian Morgan wrote:

>OK, since there is definately a difference other than length between the
>vowel in school/cool/fool/tool versus could/book/wool/woman, I shall
>henceforth use [w:] for the former and [u] for the latter. Any
>objections?
But [w:] would still have the same status as a consonant -- this time
though its geminate. You need a vowel, so a better one would perhaps be
[w=] (syllabic [w]), but that too is problematic since [u] is essentially
a syllabic [w] and we agreed that there is a length difference, no?
Anyways, if you're sure that there's a difference in quality as well, and
we can't figure out what it is, then I guess any symbol will do for now.

>> I'm not sure what you mean by tightness. If you refering to
>> aperture, then I'd say that I haven't detected any difference in
>> aperture between these two vowel sounds. Perhaps its a dialectal
>> thing.
>
>Here's a minimal pair for you: 'could' [kud] vs 'cooled' [kw:ld].
Hmmm... now I'm really having doubts as to whats happening before /l/. I
need to hear my Brisbane pals again. I suspect your [w:] is really [u-:].
This actually makes more sense now that I think about it. If /l/ has that
effect of erasing the [y] glide of long /u/, then [u-y] becomes [u-:]
before /l/.

>> >> >> For instance, words like "no/know" get rendered as
>> >> >> [no-y].
>
>I really want to hear [y] and [U] next to each other because I'm quite
>convinced that I *cannot* tell the difference between Australian /u/ and
>that of most other English dialects I've heard. But I agree with you that
>the vowel is fronted if I understand the term correctly.
>
>Can you name other English dialects in which [y] is used?
Wild guess: Cockney.

Its the Australian dialects that for me are characterized by (among
other things) use of [y]. Other dialects of English haven't caught
my attention in this same regard, but they probably exist.


-----<snip>-----

I have added below how I recall these vowels spoken in Brisbane. Remember
that I'm not a native speaker of Brisbane English, so you have to take
this with a grain of salt.

>-----------------
>Australian vowels
>-----------------
>                     In Brisbane
>mat    = [b&t]       [mEt]
>mad    = [m&:d]      [mE:d]
>mate   = [m&it]      [majt]
>might  = [mait]      [mAjt]
>met    = [met]       [met]
>nit    = [nIt]       [nit]
>neat   = [ni:t]      [nijt]
>not    = [nOt]       [nOt]
>gone   = [gO:n]      [gO:n]
>note   = [no-yt]     [no-yt]
>who    = [hy:]       [hu-y]
>nook   = [nuk]       [nuk]
>fool   = [fw:l]      (I'm not sure here)
>bottle = [bOtl:]     [bOtl=]
>mutt   = [mat]       [mat]
>March  = [ma:tS]     [ma:tS]
>murk   = [mR:k]      [mo-:k]
>air    = [e:@]       [e:@_^] ~ [e:]
>ear    = [i:@]       [i:@_^] ~ [i:]
(Where [@_^] is a schwa with a non-syllabic diacritic)

Note that I never heard any occurences of [&] in Brisbane. All the short
front vowels are shifted one notch higher compared with say RP English.

>Have I missed anything?
What about "boy" [boj] and "boil" [bojl]?

-kristian- 8)