Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!cam-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!not-for-mail
From: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: sigh, sight, soveignty
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ellis-nfs.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <E44GFt.8FL@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <32CC6CE5.4E47@kkc.hawaii.us> <1997011216165439599@yellow-gre-146.wanadoo.fr> <E3yJvG.D6G@midway.uchicago.edu> <1997011521525445418@yellow-gre-154.wanadoo.fr>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 22:14:17 GMT
Lines: 45

In article <1997011521525445418@yellow-gre-154.wanadoo.fr>,
Martin Sheffield <martin.sheffield@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>Daniel von Brighoff <deb5@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:
>
>> M Sheffield wrote:
>> >S Martin wrote:
>> >
>> >> I doubt we could convince the rest
>> >> of the world to spell "sigh" and "sight" with different vowels.. 
>
>> >I think they are usually taught as being identical.
>
>> In most dialects of English, they are.
>
>They are what? identical? or taught as being identical?

Both.

>I'm not trying to be facetious.
>As far as the teaching element is concerned, I was thinking of the
>teaching of English as a foreign language. Although I am quite convinced
>that "side", "sign", "sigh" have longer vowels than "sight", I have
>never found this distinction mentioned in any pedagogical work. Probably
>because it doesn't really matter, being non-distinctive. But I can't
>help feeling that it is this kind of detail that helps distinguish a
>native english speaker from people that have learnt EFL.

One can't teach every detail of native pronunciation, else ther would be
no time to impart vocabulary and grammar.  Details like this are best left
for people to discover for themselves.  If my teachers for German had
tried to train me in every nuance of German pronunciation (e.g. the
roundedness of the <sch>, the lack of regressive nasalisation [a
non-distinctive feature of my native dialect], etc.), I doubt I'd speak a
word today.  I'd have been so focused on getting the details correct (Is
my tongue in the right position?  Am I making this sound to rounded?) I
never would've gotten an ounce of conversational practice.  They taught me
the most important distinctions and I did my best to imitate the non-
contrastive ones I heard from them and other native speakers.  Someone
must have done something right because I'm occasionally mistaken for a
native speaker.

-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
