Re: why can't the BBC


"Richard Herring" <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:LDr2FqJMrWNIFwyP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In message <_tcZj.3516$IK1.1525@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Atkinson <johnacko@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes

"Richard Herring" <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:bVkSwFExgTNIFwBY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In message <WC5Zj.3363$IK1.1421@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Atkinson <johnacko@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes

"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote...
Richard Herring <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Richard Herring <junk@[127.0.0.1]>:

[...]

>>... both sound something like [bV'rak] to me.

>That's /b@'rA:k/, in a transcription more usual for BrE.

My [] were there for a reason...

PS I thought /A/ represents a back vowel? Did you mean /&/?

Initially there was some variation between /&/ and /a/ in the name,
but it settled down as /a/ after it became familiar.

PPS Phonemic representations of BrE generally have no need for /:/.

?? Phonemic descriptions of BrE vs. AmE usually note that Br
phonologists think it's length that's signifcant and Am phonologists
that it's the offglide that's significant.

I'm sure hasty overgeneralization is a concept you're familiar with ;-)

This nonlinguist tends to agree with the former, anyway for his own dialect. But it may depend on the vowel:

For bin/bean and pull/pool, length, offglide and height all differ, but length seems most significant.

For bet/bait and cot/coat, all three differ again, but offglide is pretty clearly most significant,

For but/bart, there's no difference in height or frontness and no offglide; length is the only significant difference. (This is not so in non-Australian varieties, where they also differ in height and/or frontness.)

For lad/bad, length is the only significant difference. (This rather marginal phonemic split apparently also holds for some varieties in England.)

So what would be a minimal pair for /A/ versus /A:/ ?

Not sure what you're after.

A reason why someone would write /A:/ rather than just /A/.

Because it's a long vowel? Vowels in English fall into two classes. There are the six "short" or "checked" vowels which are subject to the phonotactic constraint that they can't occur in stressed monosyllables with no final consonants, and which, in South Brit (but not American or Scottish English), are characteristically of shorter duration. And all the rest, the 13 "long" vowels and diphthongs, which can appear in stressed monosyllables with no final consonant, and which are characteristically of longer duration in South Brit.

In other languages in which there is a distinction between long and short vowels, normal practice is for the long vowel phonemes are written long (e.g. using ":", or a macron, or by writing the vowel double), whether or not there is a corresponding short vowel, The same practice is followed by Br phonologists -- all the "long" vowels are distinguished either by using ":" or, in the case of diphthongs, digraphs.

OTOH, Gen Am's similar division into 5 "checked" and about 10 "free" vowel phonemes doesn't correspond to a length contrast, so it's reasonable to use /A/ for the PALM vowel in that system.

(I've left out /@/ in both systems, since it can't appear in stressed syllables anyway.)

[...]

John.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)
    ... Well I did say in my dialect, others may differ. ... I may use different allophones for the second vowel but I am fairly ... But we regard that phoneme as /p/ even though the allophone lies ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: why cant the BBC
    ... phonologists think it's length that's signifcant and Am phonologists ... For bin/bean and pull/pool, length, offglide and height all differ, but length seems most significant. ... (This rather marginal phonemic split apparently also holds for some varieties in England.) ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: why cant the BBC
    ... In message, John Atkinson writes ... phonologists think it's length that's signifcant and Am phonologists ... For bin/bean and pull/pool, length, offglide and height all differ, but length seems most significant. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: why cant the BBC
    ... phonologists think it's length that's signifcant and Am phonologists ... For bin/bean and pull/pool, length, offglide and height all differ, but length seems most significant. ... (This is not so in non-Australian varieties, where they also differ in height and/or frontness.) ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: why cant the BBC
    ... phonologists think it's length that's signifcant and Am phonologists ... For bin/bean and pull/pool, length, offglide and height all differ, but length seems most significant. ... (This is not so in non-Australian varieties, where they also differ in height and/or frontness.) ...
    (sci.lang)