+0
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.
1 2
Comments  
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?
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?
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
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.
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.
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.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
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.
DipsikI 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.
DipsikThis 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.
Dipsikand 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.)

Emotion: smile

CJ
Re: segmental
DipsikAs for the first part, I suppose it is the second syllable that is stressed
Yes.
Dipsikin 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
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Show more