Earth to Mxsmanic!

Mxsmanic keeps on insisting that vowel length is not phonemic in English and that it's not been for centuries. I told him that, if vowel length has not been phonemic in English for centuries, then why do I pronounce ''bade'' as /b{d/, ''bad'' as /b{:d/, ''merry'' as /meri/, ''Mary'' as /me:ri/, ''sum'' as /s6m/, ''psalm'' as /s6:m/, ''Sirius'' as /sIri@s/ and ''serious'' as /sI:ri@s/? He has not answered my question, but just keeps on insisting that vowel length is ''not'' phonemic in any dialect of English. Vowel length is certainly phonemic in my dialect of English. Does Mxsmanic just have a hard time understanding that RP and General American are not the only dialects of English in the world?

Mxsmanic, you're false! When will you understand that?

To all,

Anything else you have to say about vowel length being phonemic should be posted here. We don't need to have zillions of threads about this one topic. Let's keep this discussion on one thread, rather than have zillions of them.

<<Does Mxsmanic just have a hard time understanding that RP and General American are not the only dialects of English in the world?>>

Yep.

<<Does Mxsmanic just have a hard time understanding that RP and General American are not the only dialects of English in the world?>>

It would seem so.

My response to this can be basically summed up as "ditto" to Lazar and Kirk's replies.

Have you tried just ignoring him?

There are only 20 million Australians, and they don't get out of Australia much. I've never had a student who wanted to learn Australian pronunciations specifically. Students want to learn GAE or RP, or just "English," preferably with a pronunciation that people won't consider "foreign" (and more native speakers speak GAE than anything else, that means American, although some want RP for prestige reasons or because they communicate mainly with the UK).

I work with English teachers who are native Anglophones from around the world. It is very rare for students to request a specific pronunciation; they just want native pronunciation. A plurality of teachers are from some part of the UK; a fair number are from Australia or New Zealand; a handful are American (it's hard for Americans to get work permits in Europe) or Ireland; and some are from one of the many other countries where native English speakers can be found. Frankly, they all sound the same after about 15 minutes; the differences in pronunciation can almost be disregarded, even when teaching.

As for phonemic vowel length, making a distinction in vowel length habitually is not the same as making a phonemic distinction. You have to count the minimal pairs that actually depend exclusively on vowel length. Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished. The other examples you give also imply that these are not phonemic distinctions so much as habitual features of the pronunciation, just as they are for many other native speakers.

Most people here seem to be talking about English from the top of an ivory tower, whereas I actually have to teach it. Many of the things that people here consider important actually are not from a practical standpoint, and vice versa.

>>There are only 20 million Australians, and they don't get out of Australia much. I've never had a student who wanted to learn Australian pronunciations specifically. Students want to learn GAE or RP, or just "English," preferably with a pronunciation that people won't consider "foreign" (and more native speakers speak GAE than anything else, that means American, although some want RP for prestige reasons or because they communicate mainly with the UK).<<

Obviously you don't understand that there is more to the study of languages than your own extremely narrow views with respect to ESL teaching.

>>I work with English teachers who are native Anglophones from around the world. It is very rare for students to request a specific pronunciation; they just want native pronunciation. A plurality of teachers are from some part of the UK; a fair number are from Australia or New Zealand; a handful are American (it's hard for Americans to get work permits in Europe) or Ireland; and some are from one of the many other countries where native English speakers can be found. Frankly, they all sound the same after about 15 minutes; the differences in pronunciation can almost be disregarded, even when teaching.<<

So why is it that people who live about, I would think, little more than an hour and a half at average freeway speeds south of where I am from often comment about how, well, people from the Milwaukee area sound funny if such little details somehow don't matter at all? Maybe non-native speakers might not notice some little details, but native speakers often definitely can.

>>As for phonemic vowel length, making a distinction in vowel length habitually is not the same as making a phonemic distinction. You have to count the minimal pairs that actually depend exclusively on vowel length. Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished. The other examples you give also imply that these are not phonemic distinctions so much as habitual features of the pronunciation, just as they are for many other native speakers.<<

Did you at all read what Aussie Fisher *JUST POSTED*? I saw a good few *minimal pairs* unambiguously demonstrating a *phonemic* vowel length distinction in at least some Australian English dialects. DO YOU KNOW WHAT A MINIMAL PAIR IS? DO YOU?

>>Most people here seem to be talking about English from the top of an ivory tower, whereas I actually have to teach it. Many of the things that people here consider important actually are not from a practical standpoint, and vice versa. <<

No, it's because you are either an idiot who can't see that those on said "ivory tower" are right, or you are an elitist who is certain that your few chosen "correct" forms of English are all that need consideration. Or both, most likely.

<<As for phonemic vowel length, making a distinction in vowel length habitually is not the same as making a phonemic distinction. You have to count the minimal pairs that actually depend exclusively on vowel length. Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished. The other examples you give also imply that these are not phonemic distinctions so much as habitual features of the pronunciation, just as they are for many other native speakers.>>

I have to agree with Travis here - you don't seem to have a clue what a minimal pair is. Every single example that Aussie Fisher gave was a legitimate, true minimal pair.

<<Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished.>>

What the hell does that have to do with their being a minimal pair? Regardless of the "importance" of the distinction, the distinction *is made*.

This has been discussed ad nauseam and Jim keeps posting http://www.shlrc.mq.edu.au/~felicity/vowel_description22.pdf each time it comes up, thread after thread. The main point is it is most relevant to British and nonrhotic English.

Most of those minimal pairs shown by Fisher are petty. But other minimal pairs are quite significant where a written "r" serves to lengthen the duration of a preceding vowel. Contrast "but" in butter and "bart" in barter, in nonrhotic English, such that length may be partially or fully attributable to these phonemes.

Page 4:
"Mitchell and Delbridge, 1965b). Bernard (1967b) and Cochrane (1967) have shown that duration is the primary cue for discriminating between the vowels [/a/ and /V/]. Other potential length contrasts exist between [/E, E:/ and /i, i:/] which for many, perhaps most, AusE speakers contrast exclusively by duration in closed syllables; for instance, “bid”
compared with “beard”, or “dead” compared with “dared”."

Contrast "but" in butter and "bart" in barter, in nonrhotic English, *such that length may be partially or fully attributable to these phonemes.

Better still:
*such that the minimal pairs may be partially or fully attributable to contrastive length.

Earth to Mxsmanic! Earth to Mxsmanic! Can you read us, Mxsmanic?

Do you think that you're the only ESL teacher on this forum? Do you think that being an ESL teacher makes you an expert?

Don't you think it's better to teach students what they need than to teach them what they think they want?

Be it phonemic or not native speakers, as you recognise, habitually make a vowel length distinction. Vowel positions can shift about from dialect to dialect but, generally, long vowels tend to stay long and short ones short.

Vowel length still is a cue that helps the listener recognise the vowel. It is by no means a waste of time impressing on students that they should keep their long vowels long and their short ones short.

This is particularly true where you're dealing with languages that have a very limitted set of vowel positions. What would your advice be to an ESL teacher in Japan? Japanese has only five vowel positions.

Anyhow, when it comes to ESL, probably the best way to deal with teaching vowels is to model the pronunciation ... length & all. This is the way teachers have been doing it ever since there were language teachers. This is probably exactly how you actually teach, Mxsmanic, for all of your hot air ... how else could you hold on to your job?

<<Most people here seem to be talking about English from the top of an ivory tower, whereas I actually have to teach it.>>

That's funny you think you could be the only person possible involved with ESL here. I happen to work part-time at an ESL center where I *actually* (believe it or not!) have to teach it as well. I refuse to waste my time responding to your other ridiculous comments but I just thought this one was a particular gem:

<<There are only 20 million Australians, and they don't get out of Australia much.>>

Yeah, *only* 20 million. And apparently they're such a homebound people. And thinking they're all special with their little dialect whose significance they blow way out of proportion. In fact, you know what? Fuck them. If there's only 20 million speaking a certain dialect why even count it?

*huuuugge eye roll directed right at Mxsmanic*

<<Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished.>>

Are you Sirius?

<<You have to count the minimal pairs that actually depend exclusively on vowel length. Sirius and serious are not often confused in conversation and don't need to be distinguished. The other examples you give also imply that these are not phonemic distinctions so much as habitual features of the pronunciation, just as they are for many other native speakers.>>

There are a lot of minimal pairs that depend exclusively on vowel length in my accent. Do you want me to list some more? Well, here goes (plus the ones I've already mentioned):

bade - bad
merry - Mary
sum - psalm
Sirius - serious
ferry - fairy
cut - cart
bun - barn
widow - weirdo
bid - beard
piss - pierce
mutt - mart
duck - dark
can (able to) - can (metal container)
bum - balm
buck - bark
span (past tense of spin) - span (life span)
come - calm
us - arse
cuff - calf
an - Ann
bed - bared
head - haired
done - darn
putt - part
cunt - can't

And many more. Isn't that a lot of pairs distinguish only by vowel length?

<<Isn't that a lot of pairs distinguish only by vowel length?>>

''distinguish'' should be ''distinguished''.