Re: Generalizations about English spelling

Steve Bett wrote:

>
> Richard,
>
> I am not an expert on this system designed to make English spelling
> more transparent while minimizing word-sign disruption. The 4 rules
> are published. I could post them. The forth rule is fairly easy f =
> [f]. (no ph spellings) phone respelled fone.
>
> According to you the traditional writing system implies that ale and
> day should be pronounced with a different vowel. Can you be any
> more precise?
>
> Most dictionary pronunciation guides for GA indicate the same vowel
> Webster: Al, dA. (ál, dá). An Australian dictionary might
> indicate two different vowels: Al and dI (ál dí) /eIL daI/
> You did not indicate what the vowel should be according to the
> historical orthography and Peter didn't indicate how he pronounced
> these words other than to say that they did not have the same vowel.

/eh/ and /ey/ respectively, if you know about Smith-Trager phonemic
notation; I have not been able to discover what the standard phonetic
representation of the New York distinction between <can> 'be able' /k&n/
and 'food container' /kehn/; the latter is the usual Midwestern
pronounciation of both vowels, but not even in Chicago does <can> rhyme
with <cane> /ey/.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...