The syllabic l differs from a schwer in that it is not a vowel, but a
a glide from a schwa to the l consonant. For that reason, I usually
spell it as a schwa followed by an l. The IPA indicates a syllabic
l by placing a superscript schwa before it. But I'm never certain
how to deal with either of these sounds. It seems to me that when an
l is followed by a consonant, it is generally syllabic (but not
necessarily in all cases), and before a vowel it is not. For the
most part, at least, this is decided by position.
I wonder if, perhaps, r sounds could be treated the same way.
If you ask an average American whether a final r is a consonant or a
vowel, I'd wager that almost everone would think of it as a
consonant, even though it isn't really. So, why can't we just use r
for a syllabic r as well? In this case, I would spell the
word "roar" as "rOr." I would then spell the word "ear" as "Ir."
Readers would know that the r in "array" is not syllabic because it's
followed by a vowel. The r in "board" is syllabic because it is not
followed by a vowel. Since most Americans don't distinguish between
them, we can hardly consider them seperate phonemes. These are just
different realizations of the same phoneme (it is hardly uncommon for
a single phoneme to come out differently in different environments).
Non-rhotic accents like British, however, are an entirely different
matter. The syllabic r in these accents can just be left out since
it isn't pronounced.
-Joe
--- In shavian@..., "paul vandenbrink"
<pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> Hi Hugh
>
> I guess the problem with your suggestion from the American point of
> view, is that there is no Shaw letter for Schwa in the
International
> Shaw Alphabet, because we had absorbed the soft "u" sound
into "Ado".
> This is my one original reservation, where I suggested we might
need
> another letter to indicate syllabic sounds (embedded Schwa) like
> the "er" and the "le" (table,girl).
> Remember, I suggested using a period to indicate that embedded
Schwa
> sound. As the Schwerr sound, like the Schwa sound is very common in
> American/Canadian accented English, I don't think it should also be
> lumped in with the Shaw letter "Ado".
> Obviously, retaining another letter for the Original Shaw Alphabet
> would work too, but we are trying to minimized the vowel letters.
>
> I don't believe that English has too many vowel sounds, but as they
> tend to morph into each other in what I consider to be a haphazard
> manner, I think they need to be dealt with in a severe and rigorous
> manner. That is to say the vowel sounds need to be represented
> clearly with out regard for inconsequential distinctions that have
> been retained in older and archaic versions of English.
>
> Regards, Paul V
>
> P.S. The R sound could be classified by Ethan's rule as a vowel
> because the tongue never touches the mouth in a normal English
> Retroflex R.
> Perhaps that is the reason we treat the R (Schwerr) differently
than
> the syllabic L.
>
> ______________attached__________________________
>
> --- In shavian@..., mixsynth@b... wrote:
> > Paul wrote:
> > ===
> > Hey Hugh
> > After going through a number of these responses, it seems that
most
> > interested people are interested in retaining in the Shaw
> > International Alphabet, the vocalic vowel "r" letter from the
> > Original Shaw Alphabet.
> > But as there are 2 letters representing this sound (Array, Err),
> > which one makes the most sense to add back in?
> > Ethan seems to prefer "err", possibly because he could not make
> sense
> > of "Array". I prefer "Array" for a couple of inconsequential
> > reasons. Any other preferences. American accents preferred.
> > MAJORITY RULES.
> > ===
> >
> > About the letter 'err'. I think it important to leave it out and
> consolidate the subtle difference Ethan mentions in 'ado'+'roll'.
The
> difference between a syllabic 'r' and a separated 'a'+'r' is not
> really worth the two letters, as i see it. It leads to more
spelling
> differences (again, mostly between US- and Brit-Eng) that are
easily
> avoided by using just the one combination in both the situations.
> >
> > Hugh
> > (from mobile phone so sorry about the quality!)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=408572227>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .