Jim, there are many sounds in the English language. But not every sound is a phoneme.
''vain'' and ''vein'' have the same sound and so therefore they can't possibly have a different phoneme.
According to your defintion, Hroo, there is a phonemic difference between the vowels in these pairs of words:
vein/vain
thought/caught
sun/son
wood/would
brown/noun
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Jim, how can there be a phonemic difference between those vowels when there's not even a phonetic difference.
Jim, if you think I was say that there was a phonemic difference between the vowels in ''vain'' and ''vein'' then you obviously don't understand that one sound can't be two phonemes.
Hroo, Just ignore Jim because he's a stupid sinning atheist who doesn't believe in his own creator. You should ignore what atheists have to tell you.
No single sounds are ever two different phonemes. If it's the same sound it must be the same phoneme but not the other way around. The ''t'' in ''tiger'' and the ''t'' in ''sting'' are different sounds but the same phoneme.
''According to your defintion, Hroo, there is a phonemic difference between the vowels in these pairs of words:
vein/vain
thought/caught
sun/son
wood/would
brown/noun'''
Jim, what you just said is like saying ''They got divorced before they were ever married''. Sounds can only be one phoneme. For example IPA's [a] can only be one phoneme. [a] doesn't exist in English.
Saying sounds can be more than one phoneme is like say ''They got divorced before they were ever married''
Here's my definition of a phoneme changing a few words. Perhaps Jim will better understand what I think a phoneme is,
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with the same letter but does not distinction any words or cause any other words not to right it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically the same and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's not a phoneme (nor can it possibly be).
Here's my definition of a phoneme changing a few words. Perhaps Jim will better understand what I think a phoneme is,
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with the same letter but does not distinction any words or cause any other words not to right it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically the same and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's not a phoneme (nor can it possibly be).
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Read this carefully and you will see that I'm not claiming that ''vain'' and ''vein'' are pronounced differently. My definition no where says that ''vain'' and ''vein'' are not homophones.
Typo- It should be,
Here's my definition of a phoneme changing a few words. Perhaps Jim will better understand what I think a phoneme is,
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with the same letter but does not distinction any words or cause any other words not to rhyme it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically different and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's a phoneme.
If a sound is phonetically the same and spelled with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's not a phoneme (nor can it possibly be).
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Read this carefully and you will see that I'm not claiming that ''vain'' and ''vein'' are pronounced differently. My definition no where says that ''vain'' and ''vein'' are not homophones.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Sorry for the triple posts but I made a mistake on my first post.
Here's your old "definition":
"If a sound produces minimal pairs, makes words not rhyme with each other or is written with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's a phoneme."
I understand it perfectly. The only problem is that it's wrong. We can rewrite this "definition" like this:
"If a sound produces minimal pairs then it's a phoneme."
"If a sound makes words not rhyme with each other then it's a phoneme."
"If a sound is written with a different letter/diagraph/trigraph than the other sound then it's a phoneme."
This follows simply from the meaning of the word "or" (I assume you know the meaning of the word)
And here's how you used it to "show" that [N] and [h] were not allophones:
"So, [h] and [N] are phonemes because [h] is written with the letter 'h' and [N] is written with the diagraph 'ng'."
Look carefully. Have you given me a minimal pair with [h] and [N]? No. Have you given me a pair of words which don't rhyme because of the switching of [h] and [N]? No. You've just relied on spelling.
It follows directly from your definition that sounds spelt differently must be different phonemically. Hence, with a similar argument I could say:
"So, [æi] and [ei] are phonemes because [æi] is written with the digraph 'ai' and [ei] is written with the diagraph 'ei'. Where [æi] is the vowel in 'vain' and [ei] is the vowel in 'vein'."
Now on to your new "defintion" ... do I better understand it now? Well, it's a different definition now. Yes, it's better but it completely colapses for any language which does not use letters to write.
By the way it's "distinguish" not "distinction" as in "does not distinguish any words" (not "does not distinction any words"). The latter is a noun the former is the verb you're after.
Well, Anyway, Why would [N] be an allophone of [h] and not an allophone of [j], [w] or even [W]? An similarly why is the the dark /l/ an allophone of /l/ and not an allophone of /w/. My new definition of a phoneme tells why.
Only problem is that your so-called "definition" (new or old) is nothing of the sort.
"... changing a few words ..." you write. It's a completely new definition. Those words have changed the meaning but no matter: either "definition" is completely wrong.
"If a sound is phonetically different ..." Different? To what?
"If a sound is phonetically the same ..." The same? As what?
There's something missing in this so called "definition".
Jim, I pronounce ''vain'' and ''vein'' differently. I pronounce ''vain'' as [v@in] and ''vein'' as [vein]. I'm from Northern England.
I notice that many people pronounce ''vain'' as if it were ''vein''. That just sounds strange to me. It seems more logical to me to pronounce ''vain'' and ''vein'' differently. Australians pronounce ''vein'' as if it were ''vain''.
Similarly these word pairs are distinct in my accent,
weigh / way - [wei] vs. [w@i]
weight / wait - [weit] vs. [w@it]
heir / air - [eir] vs. [@ir]
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Tom's chart has no symbol for my ''vain'' vowel. Why is that I wonder? For me ''vain'' and ''vein'' have two distinct phonemes.
Jim writes-"So, [æi] and [ei] are phonemes because [æi] is written with the digraph 'ai' and [ei] is written with the diagraph 'ei'. Where [æi] is the vowel in 'vain' and [ei] is the vowel in 'vein'."
Here's my response- exactly. They are for me.
There's ''Ngami Lake'' that starts with a [N]. Pronounced [Na:mi] by me.
''The rule regarding this proposed [h]/[N] (let's call it /hN/) allophone might be something like this. Syllable initially pronounce it with the [h] allophone except between vowels. Postvocalically at the end of a syllable or between vowels pronounce it with the [N] allophone.''
That won't work for me. I pronounce Ngami as [Na:mi] not with the ''h'' sound in ''house''.