This again points out the differences between US English and other varieties 
(such as RP) where these vowel differences are not found. Also, as Karen 
points out, the main difference in US English may well be the quality rather 
than the quantity.

An over-emphasis on producing an ideal spelling system (which, as with all 
previous attempts at reforming English spelling, is unlikely ever to get 
anywhere) leads to a selective (and segment-bound) approach to phonetics. 
Maybe Tom should look at the unsuccessful 'Initial Teaching Alphabet' of the 
1960s in the UK, and at the evidence against phonics and against the 
importance of phonological awareness in reading acquisition, before pushing 
spelling reform as an aid to reading. A monodialectal spelling system is 
going to be mighty restricted in the English-speaking world anyway.

Further, complaints that speakers aren't speaking the distinctions marked by 
orthography (ah - awe) seem a bit odd coming from someone who wants to 
reform spelling, don't they? Or should we all be cmapaigning to insist 
speakers use dorsal fricatives wherever they are marked by <gh> in the 
spelling....

Contributions to Phonet from 'phonetics-amateurs' are always interesting, 
but perhaps just sometimes the naivete in some of the postings can be just a 
tad wearing?

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:53:44 +0800, Karen Chung wrote
> Tom,
> 
> >> I am looking for a phonetic contrast which is difficult for English 
> >> speakers to perceive, as a control stimulus in a study we are setting 
up.
> > Two that boggle my mind in native English speakers are the vowels in 
> > "ing/ink" and "ang/ank".  The question is are they long or short.  If 
> > one were to take a published input source, like m-w.com, cut out the 
> > vowels from "win/wink/wing" and "ban/bang/bank" would they all be judged 
> > "short" as every dictionary says.  My judgment is that all dictionaries 
> > are wrong, and only these non ng/nk words have short vowels.  The ng/nk 
> > vowels are long.
> > Ive looked at spectrographs of the vowels in win/wing/wink and can sort 
> > out the difference in win from the other two.  It's obvious to hear them 
> > as well.  But I think perhaps that others might not either "hear" them, 
> > be influenced by another language, or they may be trained not to 
> > acknowledge a difference.   These same native speakers say the word 
> > "English" has two short "i"s.  Just incredible to me.
> 
> 	Plenty of us "hear" them, but since the vowel sound in "wink" 
> follows the regular allophonic rule (in standard US English) of 
> tongue raising of front vowels before the voiced velar consonants of 
> /g/ and /N/
> ("ng"), it's a systematic difference, and nothing strange. The 
> sounds are in complementary distribution and fully predictable.
> 
> 	Don't you have a similar contrast between the vowels in _back_ and
> _bag_/_bang_, and between _peck_ and _peg_/_strength_? Are these two
> sets of different-sounding vowels reflected in your phonetic 
> alphabet, or only the _sin_ vs. _sink_ contrast? The three sets are 
> a "family".
> 
> 	Karen Chung


Martin J Ball, PhD, FRCSLT
Head of Department of Communicative Disorders
University of Louisiana at Lafayette