OK, since there is definately a difference other than length between the vowel in school/cool/fool/tool versus could/book/wool/woman, I shall henceforth use [w:] for the former and [u] for the latter. Any objections? > I'm not sure what you mean by tightness. If you refering to > aperture, then I'd say that I haven't detected any difference in > aperture between these two vowel sounds. Perhaps its a dialectal > thing. Here's a minimal pair for you: 'could' [kud] vs 'cooled' [kw:ld]. > >> >> For instance, words like "no/know" get rendered as > >> >> [no-y]. I really want to hear [y] and [U] next to each other because I'm quite convinced that I *cannot* tell the difference between Australian /u/ and that of most other English dialects I've heard. But I agree with you that the vowel is fronted if I understand the term correctly. Can you name other English dialects in which [y] is used? > >> Phoneme Australian American > >> /u/ [u-y] [Uw]~[u:] > >> /U/ [u] [U] > >> /o/ [o-y] [ow] > >> (where: [u-] and [o-] are centralized vowels) > > No... more like _moon_, _GOOD_, and _code_. > > >The biggest problem I have with the above is that you've got > >/u/ as a diphthong. Well, depending on what the previous > >consonant is, there might indeed be a neutral vowel ([@] > >AFAICT) emitted whilst the mouth moves from the consonant to > >the /u/. For a consonant like 'm' from which the lips must > >first move up before they move out, this is particularly > >likely. But fundamentally, the Australian /u/ is not a > >diphthong. > > Perhaps its a dialectal thing? I've always heard a diphthong there. Definately no diphthong. One thing worth mentioning: the more 'educated' the social dialect, the less prominent the transitional schwa that sometimes appears before certain vowels. In 'broad' Australian dialects, it's *very* prominent. For now, I'll accept: /u/ [y:]~[U:] /U/ [u] /o/ [o-y]~[o-U] > >No linguistics department. Only a languages department. I > >believe all the phoneticians are in the speech pathology and > >audiology department in the school of medicine. > > Oooh... what a shame. I wonder if there are online sources that > have recordings of Dan Jones. I do know that Peter Ladefoged (a > famous phonetician) has an online tutorial with recordings somewhere > out there. All you need is a search engine. And a sound card. (Which I do have, but not on the same computer that has internet access.) ----------------- Australian vowels ----------------- mat = [b&t] mad = [m&:d] mate = [m&it] might = [mait] met = [met] nit = [nIt] neat = [ni:t] not = [nOt] gone = [gO:n] note = [no-yt] who = [hy:] nook = [nuk] fool = [fw:l] bottle = [bOtl:] mutt = [mat] March = [ma:tS] murk = [mR:k] air = [e:@] ear = [i:@] Have I missed anything? ------------- Uncertainties ------------- * I think the diphthong in _noun_/_vowel_ is between [aw] & [&w] * I don't know the vowel in _gnaw_. Similar to Scottish pron. of _no_. ---------- Variations ---------- * For _fault_, I (and most people) say [fOwt], but my father says [fl:t]. * Most people here say [gew] for _girl_, but I say [gRl]. Likewise [wR:ld] for _world_. -- web. | Here and there I like to preserve a few islands of sanity netyp.com/ | within the vast sea of absurdity which is my mind. member/ | After all, you can't survive as an eight foot tall dragon | flesh eating dragon if you've got no concept of reality.