Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

12

First, if you're actually teaching English to non-native speakers, you must learn and use at least those IPA symbols that represent English phonemes. Get yourself a copy of Kenyon and Knott and use it; or borrow one of your students' bilingual dictionaries. If you help them, your students can understand the pronunciations as they appear in their bilingual ...


8

Phonemic /l/ that occurs in words like laugh and full is indeed two different sounds in many speakers, but these are just different allophones of the same underlying phoneme. In fact, phonemic /l/ can be realized as any of [l], [ɫ], [ɤ], [w], [o], or [ʊ] — see here. For most speakers of English, the allophone in laugh is phonetic [l], whereas the one in ...


7

The reason this problem arises is that the consonant in the middle of usual - which phoneticians call the voiced palatoalveolar fricative, and which is written in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) as [ʒ] - doesn't have a fixed representation in the English writing system. When it occurs in words borrowed from other languages, we usually keep the ...


7

So which pronunciation is standard for the [ʊ] sound? Rounded or unrounded? Certainly there is some rounding, but because roundedness is not phonemic in this position, there is also considerable variation in how much of it actually occurs in any given word and speaker. For example, you will find that it is generally somewhat more rounded in pull and ...


7

The general term is metathesis. I am not aware of a specific term for the first two letters. Other examples include pasketti, asteriks, revelant, nucular, but also the venerable thirteen, aks, horse, bird.


6

Yes, there is a connection between losing one phonemic property and gaining another. Most approaches to phonology conceptualize words as having double lives: on the one hand, they are made of a particular sound sequence which you have to pronounce correctly; on the other hand, the sounds in sequences are only recognized as discrete parts because they ...


6

Phonemics, or Phonology, is the study of the distribution of sound systems in human languages. A Phoneme is a particular set of sounds produced in a particular language and distinguishable by native speakers of that language from other (sets of) sounds in that language. That's what "distinctive" means -- the English phonemes /n/ and /ŋ/ can be told apart by ...


6

In California and the Southwestern U.S., the /ɪ/ in think is pronounced more like the vowel /i/ in bean, so it's close to /θiŋk/ in IPA. See this post on dialect blog, which calls it pre-velar tensing. In fact, I suspect this pronunciation is also present in the speech of some Americans who are not from the West, just judging from the way some speakers on ...


6

yes. it can either be /ɪnˈʃrʌɪn/ or /ɛnˈʃrʌɪn/. Usually, the more common is listed first.


5

At a guess (and without a recording it can be no more than that), you are doing one of two things: If you are merely "overarticulating" the /k/, like an anxious student in a voice production class, you are probably producing a little puff of air when you release the consonant. This sounds like the "BrE" recording on this page, and in IPA it is notated ...


4

Mitch is right. But onomatopoiea per se is a very insignificant phenomenon, since it can only refer to words about sounds, and how often do we talk about sounds? Onomatopoeia is, however, part of a larger, more general, and sporadically studied field of linguistic research called (variously) sound symbolism, phonosemantics, ideophones, assonance/rime ...


4

It's called a pronunciation respelling system. Its advantage is that you don't have to learn it, the way you have to learn IPA. Its disadvantage is that it is good only for speakers of the language (or even the dialect) it is intended for.


4

Consider the letter A. Now consider these: All of these forms are very different; but they are all understood as the letter A. Everybody pronounces the language differently; but what people hear is a very small number of “meaningful” sounds—phonemes. Just as we map the various physical realizations we see onto a small fixed inventory of characters, we ...


4

The transcriptions are slightly different, but they're both correct. You'll have to decide which style of transcription you prefer. Phonetizer appears to be a more phonetic and less phonemic rendering; it marks long vowels, which is a little unusual for American English transcription -- it's not clear just what the vowel length signifies since it's not ...


4

I speak a little Thai so I think I know what you are referring to. It's not a matter of lung air but a matter of how you let the air out when you are speaking, and when. The phonotax, which sound structure syllables and words have, is very different for English and Thai. 1. the number of possible consonants phonemes in the beginning of a Thai syllable is ...


4

I don't know, but here's an interesting quote from Abercrombie's book Fifty years in Phonetics. In America phonetic notation has had a curious history. Bloomfield used IPA notation in his early book An Introduction to the Study of Language, 1914, and in the English edition of his more famous Language, 1935. But since then, a strange hostility ...


4

epenthesis, or more specifically, excrescence WP: In phonology, epenthesis (/əˈpɛnθəsɪs/; Ancient Greek: ἐπένθεσις) means the addition of one or more sounds to a word, especially to the interior of a word. … excrescence, for the addition of a consonant, … On grammar.about.com: "The history of English provides examples [of epenthesis] ...


3

No, Chloë and Zoë are still stressed on the penult even when written as Chloé and Zoé. Once upon a time people would write learnéd instead of learnèd, but it doesn’t change the stress in English — as opposed to in inglés, where it does.


3

As I've had occasion to say before, English spelling does not represent English pronunciation. Consequently the letter C can represent - the voiceless alveolar sibilant /s/, as in pace /pes/ - the voiceless velar stop /k/, as in caucus /'kɔkəs/ - (as part of CH) the voiceless palatal affricative /tʃ/, as in church /tʃərtʃ/ as well as other sounds, ...


3

Apparently this is considered the normal, default pronunciation in General American. Look at, and more importantly, listen to red at the Sound Comparisons site. Notice that the General American pronunciation is given as [ɻɛd], not [ɹɛd]. On the other hand, apart from the up-talking teen-aged boy’s pronunciation provided in the “General American” ...


3

There's no definitive spelling, but as per ushe is a common one with the benefit of being fairly unambiguous. Alternatives include as per use, but that could be confused with "for each use", and as per uje, but that looks a bit odd. The OED doesn't include either, but does note as per is also a shortened form.


3

Phonetics deals with the actual sounds and their articulation, like the difference between the articulation of 't' and 'd' (where the 't' is voiceless and the 'd' is voiced). Phonology deals with the rules of how those sounds, the phonetics, are put together. For instance, how a 't' in medial position is pronounced as a flap and not a hard 't' sound (i.e. ...


3

In standard US English they are pronounced the same. I've heard Southerners pronounce "hear" as two syllables with the "r" silent, as in, "Y'all come back now, yuh he-ah." I'm surprised by Sean's statement of Kentuckians pronouncing "here" as two syllables but "hear" as one, because, as I say, the only dialect I've ever heard had it the other way around. ...


3

Some parts of the South, including the part of Kentucky I grew up in, "here" gets pronounced in the UK manner with the schwa and without the 'r' (and as two syllables), while "hear" gets pronounced in the US manner without the schwa but with the 'r'.


3

As far as I'm aware, this is essentially a US vs UK difference. Other examples where UK English has a /aɪ/ vowel and US English has a schwa include "missile", "volatile", "hostile" etc which in the US effectively tend to be pronounced as through written "mis(t)le", "volatle", "hostle" etc.


3

How you doin'? [Friends] Ha! I would distinguish the usage of "doin" from "doin's". The context in which "doin's" is the word to use is likely to be much different, and much less frequent, than "doin'", which will come up in casual conversation with some frequency, as with - "Watcha doin'?" The usage of "doin's" is likely to be entirely unrelated. ...


3

In purely phonetic terms, it is most definitely not an [e]. Few dialects of English have a true [e] (some have [eː], but that’s a different sound). The ‘long a’ diphthong can be variously transcribed as [ɛɪ], [ɛi], [eɪ], or occasionally [ei], depending on how broad the phonetic transcription is, what dialect is being transcribed, and a host of other ...


2

In English, in a non-stressed syllable, a schwa often replaces the vowel. This is what is going on here. The second syllable of both indirect and organization is not stressed. In this word, it is acceptable to replace the /aɪ/ with a schwa. And in some American dialects, when you replace an /aɪ/ with a schwa, what you get is typically an /ɪ/ and not an /ə/. ...


2

I suggest that the differences are small and pronunciations vary widely. For example, although your reference lists /ˌɪndəˈrekt/ as the preferred British pronunciation, and doesn't list it at all for American English, I overwhelmingly hear /ˌɪndəˈrekt/ in the U.S. In short, I don't think this is anything to be troubled about. People will know what you mean, ...


2

Nasal vowels may be a feature of US speech, but I’m not sure they occur in non-regional British speech. I hear no difference between the vowel in bit and the vowel in think and for the latter, indeed, the OED has /θɪŋk/, and not /θɪ̰ŋk/, for the US pronunciation. Nasal vowels are a noticeable feature of French, where they typically occur without a following ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible