English Phonemes (Was Re: [j] v. [i])

From: wtsdv
Message: 22528
Date: 2003-06-03

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "wtsdv" <liberty@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe /i/ _should_ be analyzed as an allophone
> of /j/ in English. If <ear> is analyzed as
> beginning with a glottal stop, and <you> as
> with a /j/, then you have no problem.
> ...

What about it Piotr? Can "yet", "it", "pie" and "me"
be analyzed as /jEt/, /?jt/, /paj/ and /mjj/? Can "wet",
"put", "how" and "you" be analyzed as /wEt/, /pwt/,
/haw/ and /jww/? Is it even necessary to distinguish
between /e/ in "say" and /E/ in "set", or /o/ and /O/
in English? Can't they be analyzed as /ej/ and /e/,
and /ow/ and /o/, making the full set of English vowels
(at least in my dialect) /j/, /w/, /e/, /o/, /&/, /æ/
and /a/? Or is that how it's already done?

David

P.S. "Yeast" would analyze as /jjjst/. Would that be
a problem?