No preview available.

No preview available.

What's that meant to represent? Pronunciation-wise? I think it has to be /wUk/, like "shook". I thought you probably meant /wUk/, though I'm familiar with some accents which have /u/ in words (and "snooker" has /u/ in

On 3 Nov 2003 14:48:00 -0800, I wrote, in part: It's at http://www.math.wustl.edu/~msh210/recording.html Well, I've now listened to Mr. Hamm's recording, though I will continue to study it on future occasions. My comments: First of

Donna Richoux filted: Of course, you and I wouldn't mean the same thing by "aspidester," either. I played the first part again; the ... usual "uh" ending that Brits usually say when the word ends in -er. It's a much

I'm pretty sure that in the U.S. and southern England ... accept that my CIC intuitions about this may be wrong. I think they are, for southern England; can't speak for the US. "laurel" for me rhymes with "sorrel" which

That is a definition of /A./: what /A./ is is a particular vowel phoneme. Which one? It's the ... an unambiguous definition; moreover, it's defined in terms of the things that phonemed ought to be defined in terms of. If it's a

Defining /A./ as the vowel phoneme used in "cot", "bother", ... have the same phoneme. There are dialects where they don't. That's not a definition of turned-script-a. It's a statement of how turned-script-a is

OK. I agree. Everyone was an injudicious choice "a lot of people" how about that? How many Brits in the UK do you know? I haven't conducted a census lately, but even if I had, what does the size of my circle of friends, colleagues

( . . . ) My ears can't detect any difference between the vowels of Bob's "call" and "Bob". I don't (yet) have formant-analysis software on my computer, so without knowing whether the vowels actually are objectively