On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:40:49 +0100 Paul Bennett <[log in to unmask]>
> [?_t] (which I originally wrote as ['_t]) is the sound I'd have said=20
> was used
> here in SE England.  I (and others) produce glottal sounds for both=20
> /t/ and /k/.
> In carefull colloquial speech (???) I can differentiate between the=20
> three sounds
> [?] (purely glottal, in "uh-oh"), [?_k] (back of tongue raised, in=20
> "wake up")
> and [?_t] (tip of tongue in alveolar position, in "water"). =20
> Nevertheless, the
> ponetic influence of the _k and _t are very small, but discernable.
> Ooh, blast and darn! [?_k] might actually be [k=AC] (velar stop with=20
> no audible
> release), and [?_t] might be [?_4].

> ---=20
> Pb

That's the same identification problem i have with the Rokbeigalmki
mid-word-syllable-final glottal stop which breaks between a vowel and a
semivowel so that they don't diphthongize.

_hawa_  -  /ha?wa/  -  "what"
_*haowa_  -  /hawwa/
_*haoa_  -  /haw?a/

In the word _hawa_ the front of my tongue lifts up and slightly backwards
during the glottal stop, and it sounds like it has some kind of /t/
quality to it.

-Stephen (Steg)
 "...eze-dal wa'amsh ailz, yu i yu..."
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: