--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:
> Brian:
> > I've definitely heard [ptk:lI], and I can believe [ptkllI]
> > as a slightly more careful(!) version. You're relatively
> > unlikely to hear either in North America, however.
>
> Ah, so the word is "particularly"? Alright, then I _have_ heard
> it but you transcribed it deceivingly. It must be [p&.tIk.lI]. The
> [&] in Europe would be in line with the North American syllabic
> rhotacized schwa [R]. I pronounce it [pR.tI.kjl.lR.li] with accent
> on the second syllable as usual or [pR.tI.kjl.li] if I feel
> particularly lazy or hungover.
No. It's ultimately a reduction of the RP [p&."tI.kj&.l&.lI], which
for Preantepenultimate Stress Avoidance (PSA) is reduced to
[p&."tIk.l&.lI] even by those who wouldn't syncopate <particular>
[p&."tI.kj&.l&] to [p&."tIk.l&]. While [p&."tIk.l&.lI] may further
syncopate to [p&."tIk.lI], the reduction noted here is simply the
allegro modification of shortening the vowels of the tetrasyllabic
form. Here I and the Danes may part company. I think it is reduced
to ["ptk.l.lI], with [pt] being in the onset of the first syllable
and [k] straddling the syllable boundary. They may perceive a
different syllabification.
I am not sure that [ptkllI] is a precise enough phonetic recording.
I think the vowels have been reduced to zero length rather than
totally eliminated.
I think [pt:klI] must be a reduction of [p&."tIk.lI].
Richard.