--- In phoNet@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@w...> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:51:38 +0000, Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham@n...> wrote:
>
> >the initial sequence /tr/
> >> (<tree>), which, at least in RP, is realized as a completely
> >voiceless
> >> alveolar affricate [ts.], where [s.] is of course an allophone
> >of /r/.
> >
> >Must be some new variety of RP, or a very unfortunate choice of
> >symbol.

> >[t_-r\_r_0] (plosive plus a
> >voiceless post-alveolar fricative) _occasionally_ occurs in my
> >speech. Perhaps this what you mean by [ts.]?
>
> Yes. More specifically the variant with a voiceless post-alveolar
> fricative. It's not <ch> ([tS]) as in "cheese", nor is it Polish

<trz> (I

> can't write that in IPA: it's either [ts^] or [c^s^]).

> >Incidentally, how can the IPA chart claim that 'r\_r = voiced
> >alveolar fricative'? Surely z = voiced alveolar fricative?
>
> Must be an old IPA chart. I remember them. The newer ones (as of

1989 at

> least) have it as a (dental)/alveolar/postalveolar approximant.

The chart I've got is 'revised to 1993, updated 1996', whatever that
means. It's also in the files here. I was referring to the
diacritic section, bottom right hand corner, which is also available
separately as <http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/diacritics.html>. The
1979 version makes r\ (upside down 'r') postalveolar. If it's now
meant to serve for all three varieties, that's very bad, for
intervocally I think my /D/ and /r/ are both frictionless
continuants, [D_o] versus [r\]. I may not be typical - I did not
distinguish intervocal /v/ and /D/ until I was in my teens.

Also, what are [S] and [Z] doing as post-alveloar fricatives? They
used to be palato-alveolar fricatives. Has the meaning or the
classification been changed? For voiced dental, alveolar and post-
alveolar fricatives, J. D. O'Connor had [D], [z] and [r\], and uses
a lowering hook to convert them to frictionless continuants. These
distinctions can be very useful - I suspect [z_o] is the inaccurate
French pronunciation of English /D/, usually rendered 'z' in
English, but it is definitely not the same as English [z].

Richard.