On 3/28/06, Henrik Theiling <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> > For example, "Telefon" is (for me) ['te:l@fo:n] but "telefonisch" is
> > [tel@'fo:nIS]; the [e:] turned into [e]. I'd say they're the same
> > phoneme, though. (Again, though, the short allophone is, I think,
> > restricted to borrowings.)
> Exactly. I've seen half-long diacritics for these unstressed long
> vowels that are reduced to (almost) short duration.
*nods* I've seen that, too.
> I mainly use /e/ becaues there are other mid-close vowels with
> short-long pairs, but only one mid-open long vowel /E:/. Therefore,
> for symmetry, I use:
> /o:/ vs. /o/
> /2:/ vs. /2/
> And also:
> /e:/ vs. /e/
Makes sense. Not the convention I use, but for a phonemical analysis,
it seems fine to me.
Philip Newton <[log in to unmask]>