Voronof's snowdrop

Peter Taggart petersirises@gmail.com
Wed, 03 Sep 2014 03:43:17 PDT
You deny the history and evolution of language, and the reason for
different letters. The fact remains that some spoken sounds are constant as
in "sh" and in others the sound changes as it is produced due to changing
the mouth's shape, -as in "sch". "k" and "qu" also have this difference
"(see the answer from Aad).
 If you have heard Chaucer or other 'middle' English spoken fluently you
will understand that there is good reason for all our odd spellings, and a
lot of the sounds are still mildly pronounced in English on this side of
the atlantic
Peter (UK)


On 3 September 2014 09:49, Kipp McMichael <kimcmich@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> Peter,
>   The phonemic inventories of both American and British english contain a
> single, voiceless velar stop: [k]. The voiceless velar stop in English does
> show variation in exact point of articulation depending on what phonemes
> precede and follow. This variation occurs within the speech instances of a
> single speaker, between different speakers of the same dialect, and
> certainly across dialects (of which there are many in both the UK and the
> US). These articulatory differences, however, are not systematic. They do
> not represent a phonemic distinction. Attempting to enunciate a difference
> would be better labelled "synthetic" rather than "good".
> -Kipp
>
> > From: petersirises@gmail.com
> >
> > no, the "k" and "q" are made with different parts of the mouth, it is not
> > just the "u" which makes them sound different. The k is produced with the
> > middle of the tounge against the palette and the tip of the tounge well
> > down. The "q" is made with the back of the tounge and the tip of the
> tounge
> > held up.
> > Equally  with "sh" and "sch" the sounds are created differently. This
> > disregard for pronunciation, despite good enunciation, makes many
> American
> > accents sound crass  to english speakers in Britain.
> > Peter (UK)
> >
> >
> > On 2 September 2014 23:26, penstemon <penstemon@q.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > and do you pronounce "kilt and "quilt" as indistinguishable too? In
> British
> > > English, for these, the mouth shapes differently and produces different
> > > sounds.
> > >
> > >
> > > In American English, too. "Kilt", and "kwilt". (I hardly ever use
> either
> > > word.)
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pbs mailing list
> > pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
> > http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list
> pbs@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php
> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/
>





More information about the pbs mailing list