1 3 4 5  7 8 » 32
Not ('tSA:r l-z)? By the way, the calling test can be used to determine the number of syllables. If you ... similar). If you have one, you call "Oh, (tSA: Arlz)". If the pitch falls within the vowel, you have one.

The calling test sounds useful but I do have a problem with it. There seems to be an assumption that there is a "number of syllables" that is a feature of the word that is invariant between normal speech and calling. ISTM that the word "Charles" could have a number of syllables when I call it, and a number of syllables when I speak it normally, and the two numbers are not necessarily the same.
Having said that I'm not exactly sure what a syllable is.

And I'm still interested in the definitive ASCII IPA for "Charles" with a standard American accent (assuming there is such a thing).

Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England
Actually it was me that wrote those. Charles simply shrugged ... So any problems are of my making rather than Charles's.

How you know or why you think, from email, I'm shrugging, I don't know. Why you misquote me, if you ... also don't know, but I won't be goaded into an argument over it except to say you demonstrate ***-poor form.

My apologies. No offence intended.

Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
And I'm still interested in the definitive ASCII IPA for "Charles" with a standard American accent (assuming there is such a thing).

For most Americans, it's probably (tSArlz). Much of the supposed length of the (A) resides in the (rl). Compare (tSArlz) with (tSArts): substituting (ts) for (lz) shortens the whole.
Not ('tSA:r l-z)? By the way, the calling test can ... If the pitch falls within the vowel, you have one.

The calling test sounds useful but I do have a problem with it. There seems to be an assumption that ... still interested in the definitive ASCII IPA for "Charles" with a standard American accent (assuming there is such a thing).

Why not just use AmE phonemes? /tSArlz/ works for any rhotic AmE accent, would it not? Sure, some have trouble not adding something quasi-vocalic in making out that /rl/ thing. Cf. "Quarles".
And I'm still interested in the definitive ASCII IPA for "Charles" with a standard American accent (assuming there is such a thing).

As RF would say, I don't know from ASCII IPA, but I've got a standard American accent (I think; assuming there is such a thing), and the name "Charles" is two syllables when I say it. Or, at the very least, one and seven eighths.
Sort of like: [email protected] The "@" is brief, rather like the "@" in [email protected] In both cases, the "@" would not be represented by "uh."

Does that help at all?
Maria Conlon
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
And I'm still interested in the definitive ASCII IPA for "Charles" with a standard American accent (assuming there is such a thing).

As RF would say, I don't know from ASCII IPA, but I've got a standard American accent (I think; assuming ... the "@" in [email protected] In both cases, the "@" would not be represented by "uh." Does that help at all?

If you were cooking supper for Charles and Charles was playing outside with his friend Tony Cooper from around the corner, and you wanted to call Charles to let him know that supper was ready, would you call out "CHAAA-AAARLZ" or would you call out "CHARR-ULLZ"?
If you were cooking supper for Charles and Charles was playing outside with his friend Tony Cooper from around the ... Charles to let him know that supper was ready, would you call out "CHAAA-AAARLZ" or would you call out "CHARR-ULLZ"?

I would quietly say "Dominoes," and they and all their little friends would come running.
Actually, I would call out "CHAAA-AAARLZ." But calling out is inconclusive as the effect it has is frequently to turn a one-syllable word into two.
To my ears, "Charles" is a one syllable word, albeit a somewhat protracted syllable.
I've only been skimming this part of the thread, so I don't actually know what side of the debate you're on here. When I see ASCII IPA, my eyes tend to glass over and my brain immediately fogs up.

Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
( . . . )
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 different, I can think of two explanations:

In the file we're talking about, my octogenarian voice apparently acted up a bit during the pronunciation of "call". It caused the vowel to start quite highward and frontward, then glide to the (A) position where I would expect to find it.
I've made a new recording. You can hear it at
http://tinyurl.com/qkt0 . Tinyurlophobes can hear it at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue related/speech examples/my name.mp3 . `
Formant analysis appears to show that the vowels in "call" and "Bob" in the new recording and in the old recording after the vowel in "call" settles down are both well within the region of the vowel parallelogram corresponding to the vowel (A).
The vowel in "call" is a little higher than the vowel in "Bob". It also appears to be a little farther back. I will know for sure if I ever get around to extracting the numerical values of the formants.
There apparently is an occasional slight tendency toward rounding of my vowel in "call". I've experimented with a mirror and found that among several repetitions of "call", rounding varies from none at all to a slight amount.

Rounding causes a vowel to move back on the vowel chart. This is why Ladefoged tells us not to think of front and back on the vowel chart as being strictly related to tongue position.
(a) The vowels in Bob's "Bob" and "call" actually are the same, and you're just hearing what you expect to ... fronted as to be more central vowels than back vowels(1), but before /l/ they remain fully back (u) and (oU).

I don't think I would notice any difference between my vowels in "call" and "Bob", even when "call" has a little rounding. But I have found from experience that, unless I'm alerted, I even perceive Markus Laker's (A.) and (A) as the same sound. When I'm listening for the difference, I can hear it clearly. His (A.) is greatly more rounded than my vowel in "call".
(1) Or more specifically, they're diphthongs with a central nucleus and back offglide.

Formant analysis of the speech of various people has shown that just about every vowel they utter has a noticeable amount of glide. The glide is in general context dependent. See, for example see http://tinyurl.com/qkw3 , or for TUPs
http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue related/formants/bc boo thru zoo formants.gif . `
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Formant analysis appears to show that the vowels in "call" and "Bob" in the new recording and in the ... a mirror and found that among several repetitions of "call", rounding varies from none at all to a slight amount.

Could it be that you've really been One of Us, a CINC, all along, and just didn't know it?
We welcome you, Long-Lost Brother.
Show more