Kooyeen  +  341007 Mon, 19 Mar 07 08:21 PM Hi, I'd like to hear some opinions about the L in American English. The way I see it, the L's in "lee" and "bell" are different, and the L in "belly" is mixed, the first part of that L is like in "bell" and the final part is like in "lee", therefore "bell-lee". I'll definitely appreciate your opinions, thanks Kooyeen Joined on Thu, Dec 22 2005 Italy Senior Member 4,970 Parental Advisory / Explicit Posts American English

	Alienvoord  +  341013 Mon, 19 Mar 07 08:32 PM As I learned it, syllable-final /l/ is velarized, or "dark". So /l/ in "bell" and "belly" are both dark. I suppose there could be some variation, though. Alienvoord Joined on Tue, Jul 25 2006 Toronto Full Member 345

	Kooyeen  +  341763 Wed, 21 Mar 07 07:13 PM Yeah, but how can you distinguish a syllable-final L from a syllable-initial L? It's simple if you take words like "lake" and "bell", but what if you take "California"? It's in mid-position, and that means it could be a syllable-initial L, "Ca-lifornia", or a syllable-final L, "Cal-ifornia". What I think is that a mid-position L is an hybrid, it's made up of two parts: it starts with a dark L ("Cal...") and goes on with a normal L ("...lifornia"), so you get "Cal-lifornia". And by the way, when you guys pronounce dark L in words like "bell", "cool", etc., does your tongue actually touch the roof of your mouth or not? Kooyeen

	Alienvoord  +  341770 Wed, 21 Mar 07 07:46 PM  Kooyeen wrote: Yeah, but how can you distinguish a syllable-final L from a syllable-initial L? It's simple if you take words like "lake" and "bell", but what if you take "California"? It's in mid-position, and that means it could be a syllable-initial L, "Ca-lifornia", or a syllable-final L, "Cal-ifornia". What I think is that a mid-position L is an hybrid, it's made up of two parts: it starts with a dark L ("Cal...") and goes on with a normal L ("...lifornia"), so you get "Cal-lifornia". The /l/ in "California" is syllable-initial, and I think that it is a light /l/ in my speech. And I'd like to revise my earlier comment: /l/ in "belly" is syllable-initial and light as well. And by the way, when you guys pronounce dark L in words like "bell", "cool", etc., does your tongue actually touch the roof of your mouth or not? Not. Alienvoord

	CalifJim  +  341821 Wed, 21 Mar 07 10:38 PM I agree with your characterization of mid-position L as hybrid, but I can't wrap my mind around it being composed of two parts.  If it helps you to pronounce it correctly by thinking of it that way, by all means do so.  But it's not a double L, if that's what you're thinking.  I hear and feel the L in California as being more light than dark. For dark L (for all L's, really), the tongue touches just above the teeth -- not very far back -- about the same as where it touches for making the N.  I don't know if you consider that the roof of the mouth.  You can't make any kind of L if the tongue doesn't touch anything! CJ CalifJim Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004 California Veteran Member 22,403 "There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche

	Kooyeen  +  342043 Thu, 22 Mar 07 01:02 PM  CalifJim wrote: I agree with your characterization of mid-position L as hybrid, but I can't wrap my mind around it being composed of two parts.  If it helps you to pronounce it correctly by thinking of it that way, by all means do so.  But it's not a double L, if that's what you're thinking. Thanks. No, it's not a double L of course. What I wanted to say is that a mid-position L starts like a final-position L, that is "uh-L". I think "coolish" is more like "coo-uh-lish" than "coo-lish". But again I'm starting to wonder about things I shouldn't wonder about... now I'm starting having doubts about that! In other words, now I'm starting to think that maybe a mid-position L is practically the same as an initial-position L, that is that "foolish" is not like "fool-ish" but rather like "foo-lish" (no schwa befor the L). Kooyeen

	CalifJim  +  343521 Mon, 26 Mar 07 04:53 AM ... that "foolish" is not like "fool-ish" but rather like "foo-lish" (no schwa befor the L) That sounds right to me.  I think you've got it.  Now it's time to stop agonizing over it and just talk!  CJ CalifJim

	Kooyeen  +  344106 Tue, 27 Mar 07 03:05 PM  CalifJim wrote: Now it's time to stop agonizing over it and just talk!  Yeah, you're right. Discussing pronunciation issues in a forum or chat room is often very difficult, even if we use IPA or X-SAMPA transcriptions. So I think I'll post some audio files next time I want an opinion on some accent or feature I reconize. That way there will be no misunderstanding and everything will be much clearer. Thank you. Kooyeen Accents, Pronunciation