Even when the vowel is properly spoken as a different sound, if we're de-stressing the syllable for some reason, it may well be reduced to a schwa. Use of the schwa and unstressed syllables generally go hand in hand and are extremely common in English. That will give you time to form the repeated /a/, hopefully making it less difficult, and also practice saying it (which, as we say in English, makes perfect).Īll that said, I don't think it's terribly uncommon (though I also think it's neither usual nor technically correct) to soften either one (but not both, that's definitely wrong) /had/ to /həd/. I wonder if you're trying to speak too quickly try saying the above slowly and with a clean stop between each word. it may be a serviceable tongue twister), but in normal speech this wouldn't present any difficulties. There is the contracted form of had which makes it simpler to say and sees more use in spoken colloquial English, and while this does eliminate pronunciation of a strong vowel (reduction to a schwa has the same effect but to a lesser degree), I don't think the contraction was born from a desire to avoid saying /had had/.Ĭonsider this sentence which has many consecutive /a/ syllables all bearing the same stress level:Ī native speaker might have trouble saying this quickly and repeatedly (i.e. But native English speakers don't have this problem /a/ is a common sound. You find /a/ difficult to produce because it's not a sound in your native language, which is perfectly reasonable. So even natives would have made a less hard pronunciation skill, I think. There's a stop between them, as two consecutive stressed syllables often don't flow well in English. Personally, I * pronounce this /had had/, with equal and nonzero amounts of stress on both words (assuming I'm not trying to inject emphasis via inflection).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |