James wrote:
> The vowel modification system has nothing to do with the language but the
> physical properties of the vocal tract and acoustics.
> It does not matter which language you sing in, you must modify to some
> extent when singing above the staff.
Mmm... James, I'm posting the beginning of that msg again:
"It's something that you, English speakers, don't seem to notice, since you
have many more vowel sounds than we, Romance language speakers, do."
You've just confirmed that! hehe
I'm not saying that that 'modification' is not necessary! I'm talking about
how it is perceived, and THAT DEPENDS ON THE LANGUAGE THE LISTENER SPEAKS.
The cognitive aparatus that 'interpretes' that is different, since it was
developed to distinguish vowel categories that vary according to the
language(s) you were exposed to at an early age.
A useful comparison: have you read that eskimos have different words for the
many shades of white? But how many 'shades of white' do you perceive? I
don't perceive 'shades of white', only 'white'! An eskimo painter may create
an intricate piece of art with a strikingly creative usage of those 'shades
of white' and we'll probably say: "What's so special about this
white-painted canvas?" hehe
That's the problem when 'vowel modification' is considered: what are a
DIFFERENT VOWELS to you, English speakers, IS only ONE to us! Therefore, we
can sing using those modifications and it won't 'hurt' our ears. It's not
the same for you! You notice them as DIFFERENT VOWELS, and your language has
words that depend on that perception to EXIST and be distinguished ( lEAve x
live, for example ). Ours don't!
As a Romance-language speaker, I'm an exception, since I have practiced that
distinction as I got deeper and deeper into English phonetics. But that's
not true of 99.9% of us! Even I can hardly tell the difference between the
sound of bAd and bEd, because MY BRAIN distorts it ( Kant lovers, enjoy
yourselves! ).That whole discussion of the many Ah's are nonsense to most of
us!
Given that, we can do those vowel modifications and our words won't be
PERCEIVED AS distorted. It's not the same for English native speakers. For
you, lIve is lIve and lEAve is lEAve. They're DISTINCT VOWELS and DISTINCT
WORDS, therefore they convey DISTINCT IDEAS.
Talking specifically about Italian, take a look at the hints on how to teach
American English pronunciation to Italian speakers found in a book named
'Teaching American English Pronunciation', by Peter Avery and Susan Ehrlich,
Oxford University Press, page 134:
"Tense vs. lax vowels: /iy/ vs. /I/, /ey/ vs. /E/, /uw/ vs. /u/
The distinction between tense and lax vowels DOES NOT EXIST IN ITALIAN.
ITALIAN SPEAKERS PRODUCE VOWEL SOUNDS THAT ARE BETWEEN THE TENSE AND LAX
VOWELS OF ENGLISH."
"/ae/ vs. /upside-down V/ [Caio's IPA hehe] vs. /a/
Italian speakers may have difficulty with these three relatively low vowels,
PRODUCING A SINGLE VOWEL SOUND RATHER THAN THE THREE SOUNDS FOUND IN
ENGLISH. Therefore, IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN
'HAT', 'HUT', AND 'HOT'."
Can you see?! It's not different for Portuguese speakers like me: our brains
put those confused sounds into indifferentiated slots. When a singer
modifies the vowel, it's not as extreme as to be considered a different
vowel to us. You can't say the same.
Bye,
Caio Rossi
Sao Paulo, Brazil
|
|  |
