ASCII Alphabet - adaptation?

Juan   Monday, January 19, 2004, 00:30 GMT
I made a mistake with the address

Eastie   Monday, January 19, 2004, 00:46 GMT
I checked it out. Cool site. I was surprised though that she pronounced "path" as [pa:th] rather than [p@th]. I thought the latter pronunciation was Standard AmE.
mjd   Monday, January 19, 2004, 00:53 GMT
Strange....[p@th] is definitely Standard AmE.

It's a cool site though.
Paul V   Tuesday, January 20, 2004, 16:56 GMT
The significant difference between
product ['prod^kt] or ['prod..kt] is not in the vowel pronunciation of "^" and "..".
It is in whether the first syllable is an Open or Closed syllable.
In other words is the syllable break before or after the "d".
'prah-'duct or 'prod-ect. Generally I say prod-ect.

Similar situation in the pronunciation of the verb or noun forms of
the word produce.
Garden Produce is " 'prah-duce "
To Produce a prod-ect is "pr..-'duce"

As a native (more or less), I tend to differentiate some similar vowel sounds by context and the rhythm of the word. For example, Open Syllables seem to make the vowel longer and more drawn out. This very obvious in a Male Texas accent. Since the Open Syllable vowel is longer, I tend to make more vowel distinctions in this context.

Regards, Paul V.
Jim   Wednesday, January 21, 2004, 00:19 GMT

I beg to differ. Let's use a hyphen, [-], to represent the syllable break. What I interpret you as saying is that ['prod^kt] and ['prod..kt] respectively represent the following.

A) ['pro-d^kt]
B) ['prod-..kt]

This would mean that the following is not possible.

C) ['prod-^kt]
D) ['pro-d..kt]

I, however, disagree: I can pronounce any of these four. The notation ['prod^kt] and ['prod..kt] says nothing about syllable breaks. ['prod^kt] could represent A) or C), either is possible to pronounce. ['prod..kt] could represent B) or D), again either of these is possible to pronounce too.

I can easily make the distinction between any pair of these four pronunciations. Specfically A) and D) are distinct just as B) and C) are. The distinction between A) and D) is the vowels [^] verses [..]. The same distinction exists between B) and C).

['prod^kt] could be A) or C) and ['prod..kt] could be D) or B). The distinction is the vowels [^] verses [..]. The thing is, though, I don't think that anyone actually pronounces the word as B) or D). In the real world there is A) verses C). gives

UK /prod-^kt/
US /pra:-d^kt/

So the significant difference between the way the word is actually pronounced is the syllable break you've mentioned and the first vowel but not the second vowel. This is the distinction that exists in reality but Micheal was takinging about an imaginary distinction between ['prod^kt] and ['prod..kt].
Tom   Thursday, January 22, 2004, 16:25 GMT
Doesn't the [d] normally get attached to the syllable that follows it, due to linking? Thought that was how natives pronounce it.

"My nay mi zan." (My name is Ann.)
"Fie voh sick sate." (5068)
Paul V   Thursday, January 22, 2004, 17:53 GMT
I would tend to agree with you, as I have trouble distinguishing ".." from
"^" in any case. However as "a:" is rare in US pronunciation, I would write "o:" instead.

UK /prod-^kt/
US /pro:-d^kt/

So the significant difference between the way the word is actually pronounced is the syllable break you've mentioned and less significantly the first vowel sound.
Tom   Thursday, January 22, 2004, 20:59 GMT
[a:] is rare?
"lot" "not" "got" "stop"...
Jim   Friday, January 23, 2004, 07:16 GMT
I think my pronunciation of the word pretty well fits Cambridge's description. Though it's not always so simple to figure out exactly where the division falls.
Jim   Friday, January 23, 2004, 07:27 GMT
What I mean is that it fits their description of the UK version. It could have to do with the fact that the [d] is preceeded by a stresses (not [..]) short vowel.
Ryan   Friday, January 23, 2004, 15:22 GMT
o is used for "long o" or the "o" sound in "boat." "a" is the symbol used in SAMPA. So product in US English is /"pra:d@kt/
Paul   Friday, January 23, 2004, 20:33 GMT
Hi Tom

[a:] is very rare for General American Pronunciation.
It can be found in some pronunciations of "father", "bother", "drama", "spa" for example.
Any others that are common and pronounced with a "a:

As for
"hot", "lot" "not" "got", "rock" and "stop"...
These are are the soft O sound.
This sound would be represented by a "o" in ASCII not "a:".
Regards, Paul V.

P.S. I don't hear much difference anyway, to be honest.
Paul   Friday, January 23, 2004, 20:35 GMT
pa:th is standard RP (British Pronunciation
Tom   Friday, January 23, 2004, 20:52 GMT
"Hot" etc. are transcribed with [a:] in IPA-based transcription.
The vowel used in these words in AmE is very different from the one used in BrE, so it can't possibly be transcribed with the [o].

These words are transcribed with an [o] in the shorthand transcription system -- to avoid giving two transcriptions (for AmE and BrE), you just give the British one. The reader is supposed to know that [o] turns into an [a:] in AmE.
Paul   Sunday, January 25, 2004, 18:10 GMT
This is one of the messed up parts of English Spelling,
that really tangles up the unwary.
The British Pronunciation is just too different to compare for these letters. For example, you have "four" as sample word for o: in your ASCII table. That is only true for the British pronunciation. American Pronunciation is usually "fOur" in ASCII.
So as a Canadian, I can mock/mimic the English accent, let me go to where I have surer footing.
American Pronunciation.
Most American's do not distinguish between "o", "a:" and "o:".
They are all low back vowels and minimally rounded.
cot/caught bottle/bought are considered homonymns.
Any differences that do exist are mainly a question of length or stress.
"a:" and "o:" are just longer than "o", and only "o:" is significantly longer.
I would recommend excluding either "a:" or "o" altogether in American Pronunciation.
If would nice if someone made a consistent recommendation we could all follow.

Any Professors of American Linguistics out there?

Regards, Paul V.

Regards, Paul V.