On 2016-10-10, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: > There are others, for example, in Dutch, the letter "v" and in "van" > is pronounced in dialects in continuous variations between [f] and > [v] depending on the timing of the fricative and the following > vowel.
Continuous variation is a universal truth of language. The IPA has mechanisms for describing crude differences in voicing, but if you're working at the level of, say, a difference between 0 ms and 20 ms in average voice onset time, you need to be using numbers and instruments, not symbols and the ear. The most extreme attempt I know to extend the IPA to fine phonetic detail is Canepari's book, with lots of symbols not in Unicode (I think...it's a long whlie since I looked at). It's completely ignored, because the level of detail he attempts to represent is well beyond the reproducible abilities of phoneticians unaided by acoustic analysis. > It has become popular in some dictionaries to use [d] in the > AmE where the BrE uses [t], but when listening, it sounds more like > a [t] drawn towards [d]. Are you talking about American flapping, where a /t/ between vowels is realized as [ɾ]? I'd be surprised if any very serious dictionaries use <d> to represent that - can you give an example? > One does not really speak separate consonants and vowels, but they slide over > and adapt. Describing that is pretty tricky. This is also a universal truth of language! But it doesn't stop us making sensible abstractions, and notating them symbolically. -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.