We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!
Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com
This question is Answered
1
verified answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dipsik
+
907314
Fri, 18 Sep 09 02:21 PM
Dear all,
could anyone help me mark the stresses in 'segmental phoneme'?
As for the first part, I suppose it is the second syllable that is stressed (adjective, in the first syllable there's a neutral vowel sound). However, I am not sure where the stress goes in 'phoneme'. It should probably be on the first syllable (it's a noun). However, the words seem to flow naturally when the stress is placed on the second syllable, too.
Thanks for any help
L.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Best answer by
Dipsik
+
908592
Sat, 19 Sep 09 11:17 AM
Thank you, Jim, for enlightening me.
 CalifJim“No. The first syllable of phoneme does not have a reduced vowel (schwa). The first syllable takes the primary stress and the vowel is full. ”
Well, I double checked my Macmillan and found out there is a little difference between AmE and BrE. What you said holds true for AmE; in BrE there is a full vowel in the first syllable preceded by a neutral vowel.
I guess BrE generally reduces more than AmE(?)
Nevertheless, this does not affect the standard position of the stress.
I was just thinking that, if a strong reduction took place (which is probably unlikely to happen in AmE), it might shift the stress towards the second syllable.
PS: I am sorry if I am being annoying or rude. I study English, and what I learn at school is sometimes at odds with how it works in real life. So thanks again for bearing with me.
|
|
|
|
|
All the other replies..
|
|
|
|
|
|
raindoctor
+
907452
Fri, 18 Sep 09 04:26 PM
sɛgˌmɛn təl ˈfoʊ ˌnim
That's how I transcribe it. Note that there is no neutral sound in 'seg'. There is lots of ad hoc nonsense out there on reduced vowels: why there is no neutral sound in 'pos' in posterity, despite it not being stressed?
Joined on
Sun, Apr 26 2009
Junior Member
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dipsik
+
907477
Fri, 18 Sep 09 04:46 PM
Do you really think there is no neutral sound in the first syllable of the word 'segmental'? Well, I think there is, as oposed to the word 'segment', the first syllable of which does not contain a reduced vowel (neutral), and the first syllable of which is therefore a stressed one. But hey, I admit this might not be (and most probably isn't) a hard and fast rule.
PS: could you provide a couple of examples where there is a reduced vowel and the respective syllable IS stressed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raindoctor
+
907481
Fri, 18 Sep 09 04:57 PM
Dipsik,
Check M-W, Jones and Wells dictionaries, see whether 'seg' in segment does have a reduced vowel.
I am not a fan of rule; however, I would like to look for an explanation that accounts many disparate pronunciation phenemona.
Posterity, hostility, costectomy, nostolgia, cosmetic, etc--these contradict your hypothesis that in unstrssed syllables, vowels are reduced/neutral.
For more, check this book Pronouncing english: a stress-based approach by Teschner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dipsik
+
907515
Fri, 18 Sep 09 05:27 PM
Well, I did check a dictionary (Macmillan) concerning the words 'segmental' and 'segment' and it does work precisely as I wrote above. Moreover, I asked for an example where, in spite of the vowel being reduced, the syllable IS stressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raindoctor
+
907534
Fri, 18 Sep 09 05:41 PM
The examples I quoted above contradict Macmillan's logic. Seond I don't share the same terminology you do: for instance, to me, being reduced and being stressed are not synonomous.
Lets look at the four possibilities.
1. Stressed, reduced 2. Stressed, unreduced 3. Unstressed, reduced 4. Unstressed, unreduced.
If I can show examples which fit either (1) or (4), I am right in claiming that reduction and stress are not co-extensive. That's what I did: I have shown examples of the type (4) where unstressed vowels are not reduced.
You are asking me for examples of type (1): here, you need to sharpen your question; otherwise, we would be talking for cross purposes.
Given there are short and long vowels, can one find stressed short-vowels? Yes, to this question. Let me attempt at anotehr question: can one find reduced vowels (for long vowels) in stressed syllables? As far as I know, nope, sice, for instance, /i/ plays different role in bit and bite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dipsik
+
907557
Fri, 18 Sep 09 06:09 PM
I originally talked about a 'neutral vowel sound', which to the best of my knowledge is only one and occurs where there is an extremely strong reduction. Its symbol is the so-called 'schwa' (an upside down e symbol). This neutral vowel sound cannot be found in stressed syllables - and it does occur in the first syllable of the word 'phoneme' (as a first vowel sound of this word). I do not keep talking about the neutral-vowel-equals-zero-stress just for the sake of it; I know that the periodical occurence of reduction (the strongest example of which is the neutral vowel) and stress ensures that a speech flows smoothly and naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CalifJim
+
908133
Sat, 19 Sep 09 03:26 AM
Dipsik “I originally talked about a 'neutral vowel sound', which to the best of my knowledge is only one and occurs where there is an extremely strong reduction. Its symbol is the so-called 'schwa' (an upside down e symbol).”
There are actually several schwas. They are not all identical in sound, but dictionaries usually notate these with only one common symbol for all. I think for the purposes of this discussion, schwa, neutral vowel, and reduced vowel mean the same thing.
Dipsik “This neutral vowel sound cannot be found in stressed syllables”
I agree. I can't imagine how it could be otherwise. Conversely, an unstressed syllable need not carry a neutral vowel (reduced vowel, schwa). In summary, unstressed syllables can be schwas or not; stressed syllables cannot be schwas.
Dipsik “and it does occur in the first syllable of the word 'phoneme' (as a first vowel sound of this word).”
No. The first syllable of phoneme does not have a reduced vowel (schwa). The first syllable takes the primary stress and the vowel is full. The second syllable takes a secondary stress and the vowel is full there as well. Quite similar to the pronunciation of protein.
(If the pho in phoneme were reduced, it would sound like the pho in photography, which it doesn't.)
CJ
Joined on
Mon, Aug 2 2004
California
Veteran Member
22,393
"There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CalifJim
+
908145
Sat, 19 Sep 09 03:35 AM
Re: segmentalDipsik “As for the first part, I suppose it is the second syllable that is stressed”
Yes.
Dipsik “in the first syllable there's a neutral vowel sound”
No. This is another illustration of the fact that an unstressed syllable does not require vowel reduction.
CJ
|
|
|
|
|
|