Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:42:00 -0600
From: "Donald M. Lance" engdl[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]SHOWME.MISSOURI.EDU
Subject: Re: Phonetic transcription--help
On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Alan Baragona wrote:
I have a student with a Texas
accent who, like many Southerners and Westerners, simplifies the
diphthong [ai] (among others). But I can't really transcribe her vowel
as either [a] or [ae]. Her pronunciation of like is not a homophone
of either lock [lak] or lack [laek] but is pretty much smack in the
middle, as if she stops in the middle of the glide or rather sets her
mouth to say the glide but holds the pure vowel. I don't really know how
to transcribe her like without an approximation that doesn't do her
justice and can potentially confuse the class.
On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Garland Bills wrote:
As a native speaker of that same (standard, of course) dialect, it
seems to me your characterization is quite accurate. The IPA symbols for
the three vowels in our dialect are [ae] for lack , [a] for like , and
"script a" for which I'll use [[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]] for lock . In articulatory terms,
probably the simplist (and not really too oversimplified) description is
that all three are low vowels in front, central, and back positions
respectively. Phoneticians will probably make our lives more complicated
than this -- right, Don Lance?
You bet, Garland. For some speakers the vowel of 'pot' is low central, so
the vowel of 'like' would be, in their speech, either a fronted low central
vowel or retracted low front vowel, the former being the more logical
description. This particular situation was discussed in a number of
sources in the 1950s, as I recall. If one's 'pot' vowel is low back, then
Garland's description is fine. The echo of his phonology in my head tells
me he has accurately described his own speech.
Roger Lass (Phonology..., Cambridge UP, 1984, p. 137) points out that in
historical descriptions it appears that as the Middle English long vowels
underwent the Great Vowel Shift they left the (monophthongal) phonemic
system, but some structuralist discussions of "phonemic contrasts" seemed
to treat the Southern U. S. monophthongized "long i" as if this [a] had
somehow re-entered the system of English phonemes. Phoneticians don't make
people's lives more complicated; stubborn phonetic facts do that.
DMLance