 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007How common are triphthongs ...
... in English dialects? How about in other languages? In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. (The [E] in my triphthong is halfway between [e] and the [E] in "let") The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: >... in English dialects? How about in other languages? I almost never stumble over a dipthong. >In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: >[lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. > >(The [E] in my triphthong is halfway between [e] and the [E] in "let") > The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: > > >... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > I almost never stumble over a dipthong. In which contexts do you stumble over a diphthong? I presume my "layer"* must have a triphtong because it is different from my diphthong in "lair". * the one in "layers and layers"; for the one in brick layer; I have [le:j@], The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: >> The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >In which contexts do you stumble over a diphthong? Only when I am attempting a pun. trip == stumble They aren't nearly as fun when you have to explain them. >I presume my "layer"* must have a triphtong because it is different >from my diphthong in "lair". I only speak one vowel per syllable in that word lay-er > The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: > >> The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Only when I am attempting a pun. trip == stumble > They aren't nearly as fun when you have to explain them. Too many ups & downs get you tongue-tied?:-) > >I presume my "layer"* must have a triphtong because it is different > >from my diphthong in "lair". > > I only speak one vowel per syllable in that word lay-er I do that too. In my 3 registers, I have [le:-j@] Malayali register [lej-@] British Indian register [lEI@] & [lej-@] Merkan register* * In "thick layer" and "brick layer", respectively If you can find a 2 syllable transcription that transcribes my [EI@] distinctly (differently from the other transcriptions above), then I won't object to the notion that my [EI@] spans more than one syllable - especially since I'm hardly an expert on determining where syllable boudaries fall; I'm using a different transcription from the others because it's different from them. The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: >> The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: >> >> The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >boudaries fall; I'm using a different transcription from the others >because it's different from them. I don't 'do' IPA, so you lost me there. I only popped in to make a pun. > The ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com entity posted thusly: > >> >I presume my "layer"* must have a triphtong because it is different > >> >from my diphthong in "lair". > I don't 'do' IPA, so you lost me there. I only popped in to make a > pun. Thanks for the trip:-) > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: > [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. Each of these words is monosyllabic for you? > > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > > > In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: > > [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. > > Each of these words is monosyllabic for you? To me, yes, but they wouldn't seem monosyllabic to some listeners. I speak in 3 registers; in my low register, I try to make them sound bisyllabic to the listener since they have [le:-j@r.] and [hA.-w@r.] but to me, my low register pronunciations sound monosyllabic with triphthongs. <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: > [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. > > (The [E] in my triphthong is halfway between [e] and the [E] in "let") The big difficulty in dealing with whether words like "layer" have tripthongs is that you first have to decide whether they're one or two syllables. In my dialect they're two, so not triphthongs, but I can see that there could be dialects where they're normally pronounced as single syllables. OTOH, <fire> seems to me to have only one syllable for me, which would make it a triphthong. <sour> I'm not sure about. <hawer> wouldn't be a triphthong even if it it wasn't bisyllabic -- since <haw> is a monophthong. (It's certainly not [hOU], as you seem to think, for me.) John. > <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > since <haw> is a monophthong. (It's certainly not [hOU], as you seem to > think, for me.) I never have a dipthong in haw. I have a diphthong in hawer in my RP-like and Merkan registers but in my low register, I have to get closer to Indian syllabic pronunciation in order to not seem too pretentious/ incomprehensible, such that listeners can perceive it as [hO:-U@] divisible into syllables [hO:] and [U@] (asyllabic [U]) which pronunciation is still far removed from usual low register pronuncitions but not as far removed as RP is. Listeners who don't try to analyze the first syllable as ending after [O] might, however, perceive it as having a triphthong. Sour is [sA] in my RP-like register but has triphthong [aU@] in my low and Merkan registers. "fire" is the same in all my registers; low register speakers would tend to perceive it as having the syllables [fa] and [j@] and those who don't try to percive a syllable boundary after [fa] might perceive it as having a triphthong - [faI@]. > > <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... > > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > to analyze the first syllable as ending after [O] might, however, > perceive it as having a triphthong. Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? > Sour is [sA] in my RP-like register but has triphthong [aU@] in my low > and Merkan registers. "fire" is the same in all my registers; low > register speakers would tend to perceive it as having the syllables > [fa] and [j@] and those who don't try to percive a syllable boundary > after [fa] might perceive it as having a triphthong - [faI@]. If you have an "American" register, why do you leave off the r? > > > <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... > > > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? Only in the cliche "hummers and hawers"; I might alternatively use dissemblers or equivocators if I think the listener can understand them. > > Sour is [sA] in my RP-like register but has triphthong [aU@] in my low > > and Merkan registers. "fire" is the same in all my registers; low [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > If you have an "American" register, why do you leave off the r? It's not completely American; it's Americanized British Indian. For example, I have a rhotic in horse but none in hoarse, so my hoarse remains rather like British. <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... >> > > <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... >> > > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > dissemblers or equivocators if I think the listener can understand > them. "Hummer and hawer" would be [hVm@r@nhO:r@} for me; and most Brits too, I'm sure. As is the case with Peter, I find it hard to visualise using "hawer" by itself. [...] John. 14 Jan 2007 15:38:42 -0800: "ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com" <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>: in sci.lang: >> If you have an "American" register, why do you leave off the r? Ranjit: >It's not completely American; it's Americanized British Indian. For >example, I have a rhotic in horse but none in hoarse, so my hoarse >remains rather like British. So what is this accent based on? Where did you learn it and from whom? Did you learn it at an early age or much later? Or did you invent it yourself without learning it in a natural way?  SignatureRuud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com > > > I never have a dipthong in haw. I have a diphthong in hawer in my > > > RP-like and Merkan registers but in my low register, I have to get [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > dissemblers or equivocators if I think the listener can understand > them. I don't know that cliche'. There is a hendyadis "hem and haw," but there isn't any particular reason to turn it into an agentive. But hum and haw? No. >>>> I never have a dipthong in haw. I have a diphthong in hawer in my >>>> RP-like and Merkan registers but in my low register, I have to get [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > there isn't any particular reason to turn it into an agentive. But hum > and haw? No. To me it's most familiar as a participle (sometimes a gerund): 'humming and hawing'. I had to think about the agentive before I realised what it was. Colin > >>> Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? > >> Only in the cliche "hummers and hawers"; I might alternatively use [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > and hawing'. I had to think about the agentive before I realised what it > was. sic humming not hemming? >>>>> Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? >>>> Only in the cliche "hummers and hawers"; I might alternatively use [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > sic humming not hemming? Sic. Barring this thread, it would not have occurred to me to write 'hemming'. Collins English Dictionary (1980 - the first one to hand) gives 'hum and haw' with a cross reference to 'hem'. Colin The Colin Fine entity posted thusly: >>>>>> Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? >>>>> Only in the cliche "hummers and hawers"; I might alternatively use [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >'hemming'. Collins English Dictionary (1980 - the first one to hand) >gives 'hum and haw' with a cross reference to 'hem'. This thread marks the first time I have seen or heard "hum and haw" for "hem and haw". > The Colin Fine entity posted thusly: [ ... ] > >Sic. Barring this thread, it would not have occurred to me to write > >'hemming'. Collins English Dictionary (1980 - the first one to hand) > >gives 'hum and haw' with a cross reference to 'hem'.This thread marks the first time I have seen or heard "hum and haw" > for "hem and haw". This thread marks the first time I have seen or heard "hem and haw" for "hum and haw". It must be a Pondian thing. a. > > The Colin Fine entity posted thusly: > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > This thread marks the first time I have seen or heard "hem and haw" > for "hum and haw". It must be a Pondian thing. "Hum and ha[h]" on my lips. Where used, the final "h" is not pronounced in its own right. OED eirenically says "to hum and ha (haw)". I have a sense that "hum and ha" has slightly diverged from "um and er": I won't affirm, but I feel the former is, in current use, generally metaphorical, with the latter more commonly literal. SignatureMike. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Oleg Lego wrote: >>> The Colin Fine entity posted thusly: >>>> Sic. Barring this thread, it would not have occurred to me to write >>>> 'hemming'. Collins English Dictionary (1980 - the first one to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > er": I won't affirm, but I feel the former is, in current use, > generally metaphorical, with the latter more commonly literal. M-W Online has: Main Entry: 3hem Pronunciation: 'hem Function: intransitive verb Inflected Form(s): hemmed; hem·ming 1 : to utter the sound represented by hem <hemmed and hawed before answering> 2 : EQUIVOCATE <the administration hemmed and hawed over the students' demands> SignatureSkitt Give a man a fish, and he will know where to come for fish. Teach a man to fish, and he will kill your market base. > Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? I gather - not from personal experience, you understand - that most of them fake it. SignaturePeter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists, and I can no longer receive mail at my newcastle.edu.au addresses. The optusnet address could disappear at any time. > > Does "hawer" come up frequently in your intercourse? > > I gather - not from personal experience, you understand - that most of > them fake it. They make affected ejaculations, eh?:-) Ranjit >> Sour is [sA] in my RP-like register but has triphthong [aU@] in my low >> and Merkan registers. "fire" is the same in all my registers; low >> register speakers would tend to perceive it as having the syllables >> [fa] and [j@] and those who don't try to percive a syllable boundary >> after [fa] might perceive it as having a triphthong - [faI@]. 14 Jan 2007 14:04:22 -0800: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >If you have an "American" register, why do you leave off the r? Not all Americans are rhotic? I don't understand this register thing very well, BTW. Are all three native accents, or are some imitated artificial accents? SignatureRuud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com > Ranjit > >> Sour is [sA] in my RP-like register but has triphthong [aU@] in my low [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I don't understand this register thing very well, BTW. Are all three > native accents, or are some imitated artificial accents? The 3 registers (high, mid and low) I had in India weren't just accents; apart from differences in both pronunciation and intonation, they were also lexically different and even grammatically different to some extent, so they were more like 3 dialects. I had acquired the low register by 2nd grade, the mid-register by 5th grade and the high register by 8th grade. The first two were acquired by immersion and the last was acquired under the able tutelage of 3 ex-headmasters of Public Schools that once taught British officers' children. Which register was used depended on how high the others could go, which was usually mid-register; the high register was used only with other "public" school alumni. My Merkan register is my former high register with some Britishisms replaced by Americanisms and some changes in pronunciation; eg., [O] is as closed as in British only in <oar>, <our> and <wa> contexts and [A.] is short and clipped only in a few words like "hot" and "coffee". Those pass relatively unnoticed but for some reason, "top" with a clipped [A.] attracts attention, which is disconcerting 'coz it's one of the words I don't like drawling. > I never have a dipthong in haw. I have a diphthong in hawer... How, exactly, you do you distinguish between a dipthong and a diphthong? SignatureStefano > > I never have a dipthong in haw. I have a diphthong in hawer... > > How, exactly, you do you distinguish between a dipthong and a > diphthong? I find it difficult to discern a discontinuity that can be identified as a syllable boundary. I don't know how to detect a syllable boundary even in the "ower" of Eisenhower as pronounced by Englishmen; to me, it seems to have a syllable /haU@/ with a triphthong [aU@]. > > How, exactly, you do you distinguish between a dipthong and a > > diphthong? > > I find it difficult to discern a discontinuity that can be identified > as a syllable boundary. You misunderstood my question. Please define "dipthong". Please define "diphthong". SignatureStefano > > > How, exactly, you do you distinguish between a dipthong and a > > > diphthong? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Please define "dipthong". Dunno; it was a typo. > Please define "diphthong". >>>> How, exactly, you do you distinguish between a dipthong and a >>>> diphthong? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >> Please define "diphthong". I had a teacher in junior school who not only said 'dipthong', she wrote it that way. Colin > I had a teacher in junior school who not only said 'dipthong', With [t] or [T]? > she wrote it that way. That's the less remarkable part. SignatureA computer will do what you tell it to do, but that may be much different from what you had in mind. - Joseph Weizenbaum >> I had a teacher in junior school who not only said 'dipthong', > > With [t] or [T]? [T] Colin > I had a teacher in junior school who not only said 'dipthong', she > wrote it that way. That's how I heard it throughout my school life. I didn't learn the correct spelling until years afterwards. Now that I know how to spell it, I aspirate the "p" in speech. I can't force myself to go as far as turning it into an "f". SignaturePeter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists, and I can no longer receive mail at my newcastle.edu.au addresses. The optusnet address could disappear at any time. > <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote... > The big difficulty in dealing with whether words like "layer" have > tripthongs is that you first have to decide whether they're one or two > syllables. In my dialect they're two, so not triphthongs, but I can see > that there could be dialects where they're normally pronounced as single > syllables. In my Merkan register, my "layers and layers" have triphthong [EI@] when used in a sentence whereas my layer in "brick layer" has 2 syllables - [ej] & [r]*. At any rate, I can't think of any other way to describe the difference in my pronunciation of the two. * or [ej] & [@] depending on whether the listener considers my [r] sufficiently different from a vowel to be classifiable as a syllabic approximant > The big difficulty in dealing with whether words like "layer" have > tripthongs is that you first have to decide whether they're one or two > syllables. I now see what you mean. How can it be determined how many syllables there are? If "mayor" in my Merkan register has [mEI@] and is uttered in the same amount of time as a monophthongal American's [me:r]/[mE:r], can it still be two syllables? > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: > [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. > > (The [E] in my triphthong is halfway between [e] and the [E] in "let") They are very common. That's why I only wear sandals. Stupot > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > In "layers and layers" and "hummers and hawers", I have: > [lEI@z] & [hOU@z] with triphthongs [EI@] & [OU@]. > > (The [E] in my triphthong is halfway between [e] and the [E] in "let") When I learned English pronunciation, we spent a whole lesson (or so it seems in retrospect) on the initial and final sounds of "window". The final sound, for my German ears, was something like [9oU] (SAMPA), in any case, a triphthong. But this perception is an artefact of the interference of two different phonemic systems. The same will sometimes happen between dialects of the same language. For example, many native speakers of English claim that some people in the north-eastern US say "cwaffee". They hear a diphthong where the speaker, I believe, doesn't intend one. I would expect that even when you hear something as a triphthong, it would normally be a diphthong for the speaker. In your specific case, there may be interferences between the various phonemic systems for English that you have in your head. That may also explain some of your other questions that people find hard to understand. SignatureSmith & Wesson--the original point and click interface > > ... in English dialects? How about in other languages? > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > any case, a triphthong. But this perception is an artefact of the > interference of two different phonemic systems. Interesting thought, that! > The same will sometimes happen between dialects of the same language. > For example, many native speakers of English claim that some people in > the north-eastern US say "cwaffee". They hear a diphthong where the > speaker, I believe, doesn't intend one. In that context, I seem to classify w as a consonant, so if I heard [kwO:fi], I would think of it as a consonant cluster followed by a monophthong. As it happens, however, I more often hear it as [qO:fi] than as [kwO:fi] in northeasterners' speech. It's not like the Arabic [q] but that doesn't seem to prevent me from discerning a [kw] with a shortened [w] as [q]. I'd alternatively describe it as velarized ([k~]) if it weren't for the fact that [k] is already velar. > I would expect that even when you hear something as a triphthong, it > would normally be a diphthong for the speaker. In your specific case, > there may be interferences between the various phonemic systems for > English that you have in your head. It's that elusive concept of a syllable. I detect the same number of vowels & glides that the dictionary claims are in Anglos' accents but I can't seem to detect some syllable boundaries that the dictionary claims are inbetween them* whereas I can detect syllable boundaries in English spoken with various European accents (eg. Kissinger or Brzezinski). * I seem to hear less blending of adjacent syllables at morpheme boundaries in many people's speech, hence my Merkan register's [lEI@] (single morpheme) vs. [lej][@] (two morphemes) in "thick layer" vs. "brick layer". > That may also explain some of your > other questions that people find hard to understand. Thanks for your insights. >> The same will sometimes happen between dialects of the same >> language. For example, many native speakers of English claim that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > a shortened [w] as [q]. I'd alternatively describe it as velarized > ([k~]) if it weren't for the fact that [k] is already velar. When you drink a lot of qofi, the [k] gets washed towards the back of your throat. Unless, of course, it's that horrible astringent brand of instant coffee that causes your lips to pukka. SignaturePeter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists, and I can no longer receive mail at my newcastle.edu.au addresses. The optusnet address could disappear at any time. > >> The same will sometimes happen between dialects of the same > >> language. For example, many native speakers of English claim that [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > When you drink a lot of qofi, the [k] gets washed towards the back of > your throat. Well, I concede that it is [kw] but for some queer reason, I tend to think of it as a [q] when I hear [kw] with just a trace of the [w]. While were are on the subject, ... the original word for coffee does have a [q] but I wasn't aware of that when it first sounded like a [q] to me. Come to think of it, the word that came to mind was "quoff", so I must have noticed the u but the point is that I didn't think of the consonant as a [k]. > Unless, of course, it's that horrible astringent brand of > instant coffee that causes your lips to pukka. Once, a ballboy at my tennis club asked [ingli:Sle pak na ennA sAr]? (What does "puck" mean in English?) I replied that it was a hockey ball, not wanting to waste time on the intricacies of the difference between field and ice hockey. I was back on the court by the time it occurred to me that he had been pronouncing the f word with a Tamil accent. > to me. Come to think of it, the word that came to mind was "quoff", Sorry; I meant "quaff", with "coffee?" sounding like "quaff ye?" |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.