Sarah Hawkins (sh110@cam.ac.uk)
Mon, 5 Jul 1999 16:46:00 +0100 (BST)
Dear Jill, Jana, Mark and any other people who'd like a listen:
Thanks very much for the very good recordings -- a really superb effort!
Most are fine, but there are a very few clear errors, and quite a lot
that are supposed to have only 2 feet and I'm not certain about - would
like a second opinion, as discussed with Jill and Jana.
I'm attaching a text file of the utternaces that seem to me as if they
have, or might have, problems. I think the notes included are
self-explanatory. Please do get back to me if anything is unclear though.
PLEASE NOTE: THERE IS NO ELECTRICITY IN OUR LAB ALL DAY TOMORROW, TUESDAY
6 JULY. SO DON'T TRY TO GET HOLD OF SEBASTIAN OR ME BY EMAIL. OUR PHONES
WILL PROBABLY WORK. IF YOU WANT US AND DON;T FIND US, TRY US AT HOME:
SEBASTIAN: 01223 351006
SARAH: O1954 210181
many many thanks once again
Sarah
_____________________________________________________________________
Dr. Sarah Hawkins Email: sh110@cam.ac.uk
Dept. of Linguistics Phone: +44 1223 33 50 52
University of Cambridge Fax: +44 1223 33 50 53
Sidgwick Avenue or +44 1223 33 50 62
Cambridge CB3 9DA
United Kingdom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sentences for further consdieration from the June/July 1999 new
resonance database.
Notes:
(1) There are 3 sets:
A. Senteces to re-record becuase they're definitely wrong.
B. Sentences intended to have two feet that may have three, due to
possible stress on the difficult could/might word. Jill and Jana will
listen and decide - I'm happy to say the sentences have 2 feet if J&J
say they do).
C. Some sentences that (to me) sound particularly good as having only 2
feet. Possible models for correcting those in B? And to make you feel good.
(2)
I suggest you transfer the original recordings of sentences you decide
to re-record into a subdirectory, with the same number together with
an extension like '.x', for extra, because they could come in useful.
A. Please re-record: reasons after pling (!)
R1015 We cheered the Derry supporters again. !put NS on supPORTers
R1025 We hunt for the ham in the papaya farm. !voice qual went
R1042 we think the lake in the advert is expensive. !was 'polluted' -sorry!
R1072 We 'heard it might be a 'clone. !I think 'might' was stressed
R1077 We 'heard it 'might be 'crone. !was very slow
B. Pls check: redo if you think that 'could/might' is stressed.
Those marked '!marginal' seem better than the others, and probably ok.
Those marked '!very marginal' seem even less problematic than those
marked '!marginal', on 2nd or 3rd listening.
R1059 We 'heard it could be 'crowd.
R1091 We 'heard it could be 'prayer. !marginal
R1096 We 'heard it might be a 'prayer.
R1104 We 'heard it might be a 'clash.
R1107 We 'heard it could be 'crash. !marginal
R1108 We 'heard it could be a 'crash.
R1112 We 'heard it might be a 'crash. !marginal
R1115 We 'heard it could be 'flute.
R1120 We 'heard it might be a 'flute. !marginal
R1124 We 'heard it could be a 'fruit. !very marginal
R1136 We 'heard it might be a 'bleach.
R1139 We 'heard it could be 'breach.
R1140 We 'heard it could be a 'breach.
R1143 We 'heard it might be 'breach. !marginal - a bit long???
R1152 We 'heard it might be a 'brink.
R1155 We 'heard it could be 'blink. !marginal
R1156 We 'heard it could be a 'blink. !marginal - 'a' long
R1159 We 'heard it might be 'blink.
R1167 We 'heard it might be 'crock. !marginal
R1168 We 'heard it might be a 'crock.
R1176 We 'heard it might be a 'clock.
R1179 We 'heard it could be 'clutch.
R1180 We 'heard it could be a 'clutch. !very marginal
R1183 We 'heard it might be 'clutch.
R1187 We 'heard it could be 'crutch.
R1188 We 'heard it could be a 'crutch. !marginal -- long 'a'
R1191 We 'heard it might be 'crutch. !stress on 2nd 'might'
(I've ignored the false start, of course)
R1203 We 'heard it could be 'grazier.
R1211 We 'heard it could be 'hake.
R1212 We 'heard it could be a 'hake.
R1215 We 'heard it might be 'hake.
R1216 We 'heard it might be a 'hake. !marginal
R1219 We 'heard it could be 'rake. !marginal?
R1223 We 'heard it might be 'rake. !long 'might' ??
R1228 We 'heard it could be a 'hen.
R1239 We 'heard it might be 'wren.
R1244 We 'heard it could be a 'loo. !very marginal
R1247 We 'heard it might be 'loo.
R1248 We 'heard it might be a 'loo.
R1255 We 'heard it might be 'roux.
R1256 We 'heard it might be a 'roux. !marginal
R1264 We 'heard it might be a 'lock. !marginal
R1267 We 'heard it could be 'rock.
R1268 We 'heard it could be a 'rock.
R1271 We 'heard it might be 'rock.
R1279 We 'heard it might be 'lamb.
R1280 We 'heard it might be a 'lamb. !marginal
R1283 We 'heard it could be 'ram.
R1291 We 'heard it could be 'leaf.
R1295 We 'heard it might be 'leaf.
R1296 We 'heard it might be a 'leaf.
R1299 We 'heard it could be 'reef. !low amp, but long?
C. Some very good ones from the difficult "2-foot" set.
(They might be useful to listen to see make sure we agree, and to provide
possible models for Mark. Also, of course, to congratulate yourselves!!)
R1116 We 'heard it could be a 'flute.
R1119 We 'heard it might be 'flute.
R1128 We 'heard it might be a 'fruit.
R1131 We 'heard it could be 'bleach. !contrast depends mainly on f0 - may
just as 'stressed' as some of those I've marked marginal?
R1132 We 'heard it could be a 'bleach.
R1151 We 'heard it might be 'brink.
R1164 We 'heard it could be a 'crock.
R1272 We 'heard it might be a 'rock. !might is swallowed, but rhythm
is good
R1284 We 'heard it could be a 'ram.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
end
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Jul 05 1999 - 16:48:20 BST