13.2077, Disc: Tense and Lax i

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-13-2077. Tue Aug 13 2002. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 13.2077, Disc: Tense and Lax i

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Consulting Editor:
        Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, EMU
	James Yuells, EMU		Marie Klopfenstein, WSU
	Michael Appleby, EMU		Heather Taylor, EMU
	Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U.	Richard John Harvey, EMU
	Dina Kapetangianni, EMU		Renee Galvis, WSU
	Karolina Owczarzak, EMU		Anita Wang, EMU

Software: John Remmers, E. Michigan U. <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
          Gayathri Sriram, E. Michigan U. <gayatri at linguistlist.org>
          Zhenwei Chen, E. Michigan U. <zhenwei at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.



Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:20:24 +0800
From:  "Karen S. Chung" <karchung at ccms.ntu.edu.tw>
Subject:  Re: 13.2076, Disc: New: Re Sum: Tense and Lax i

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:20:24 +0800
From:  "Karen S. Chung" <karchung at ccms.ntu.edu.tw>
Subject:  Re: 13.2076, Disc: New: Re Sum: Tense and Lax i

Re Linguist 13.2076

    Regarding the /i/ vs. /I/ discussion, it seems that there is some
confusion over whether we are talking about *phonemes* or
*allophones*. The 'i' in '-ing' as in 'going' definitely belongs to
the /I/ *phoneme* (thus the arguments about 'rhyme'), but it also
definitely has a *raised allophone* before /N/ and /g/ in both
standard US and standard British pronunciation. It is not quite up to
/i/, but it sounds closer to /i/ than to /I/ in American. There may
perhaps be somewhat less of a contrast in British English since the RP
[I] is a bit higher than in standard American, and it has no schwa
offglide, as in US English.

    And it is part of a larger pattern. /ae/ and /E/ are also both
raised before the voiced velar consonants, /N/ and /g/, though the
raising seems most pronounced before /N/. Compare _pick_ with _pig_
and _ping_; _back_ with _bag_ and _bang_; and _peck_ with _peg_ and
_strength_. I have a Web page on this for my phonetics classes at:

    http://ccms.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/intro%20page%2015.htm

    with more examples and sound files.

    I imagine that Carol Tenny was noticing a *lack* of this
(expected, standard) allophonic raising in her students, which may be
a recent trend in some varieties of US English. Actually I heard it
occasionally even decades ago in Minnesota, and at the time, it
sounded either dialectical or rustic to my then young ears.


    Karen Steffen Chung
    National Taiwan University
    karchung at ccms.ntu.edu.tw

    Subscribe to Phonetics at:
    http://ccms.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/phon1index.htm


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-2077