Random Chappie, I pronounce ''lochs'', ''locks'' and ''lox'' all differently. I pronounce words that end in ''ck'' with [x:] to distinguish them from words that end in ''k'' or ''c''. The sound [x:] is longer than the sound [x] in ''loch''.
Here's how I pronounce them,
lochs-[loxs]
locks-[lox:s]
lox-[loks]
Joe is just wrong saying that the sound [x:] doesn't exist. There are many sounds that exist in a few dialects that are not included in Tom's chart.
English Tom, you've just started a thread about one of my pet peeves. My pet peeve is when people fail to distinguish ''ck'' words from words with ''c'' or ''k''. In my accent ''yack'' and ''yak'' are distinguished in the same way they are in yours i.e. [j@x:] vs. [j@k]. Pronouncing ''ck'' as [k] instead of [x:] is lazy, silly and wrong. Why do RP speakers have to be so lazy when pronouncing words with ''ck''? RP speakers make no distinction between ''yack'' and ''yak''. In my accent they are clearly distinguished. Tom's chart is missing the phoneme [x:].
''Oh, Joe! Pooh, pooh! You can't possibly say that a sound doesn't exist in English if it isn't on Tom's chart, which is restricted to the General American and RP accents!''
''The x: sound exists in many dialects, including Scottish and, as I have learnt from English Tom, Scouse as well. It does not exist in my dialect but I am perfectly capable of pronouncing the sound.''
Random Chappie, The [x:] sound doesn't exist in English as it's not show on Tom's chart. The only sounds that exist in English are the sounds listed on Tom's chart.
''Random Chappie, The [x:] sound doesn't exist in English as it's not show on Tom's chart. The only sounds that exist in English are the sounds listed on Tom's chart.''
Joe, why don't you have a look at this link and see for yourself that what your saying is false?
Here's the link,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scouse
The [x] and [x:] sounds occur in Scouse, Wales and Scots. Tom's chart does not contain all the sounds in all English dialects and that's why it doesn't contain [x] and [x:].
That link says that our ''ck'' sound is identical to the ''ch'' sound in ''loch'', but it's a bit inaccurate. Our ''ck'' sound is longer than the ''ch'' sound in ''loch''.
i.e.
loch-[lox]
lock-[lox:]
Yep, ''yack'' and ''yak'' are not homonyms in my accent. The ''ck'' sound in my pronunciation of ''yack'' is similar to the ''ch'' in ''loch'' but a bit longer.
Tom's Chart, Truespel and Jim's phonemic spelling reform proposal do not include [x:]. Therefore, the phoneme doesn't exist in English. That link was just wrong.