lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I have noticed that some curricula, such as Logic of English, teach that the schwa sound is only in unaccented syllables and words. Others, such as CLE, seem to teach that any short "u" sound is schwa, such as in "come", "love", etc. Can someone clear this up for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 Oh, and to further complicated it, LOE says schwa can sound like short "i"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matryoshka Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I have noticed that some curricula, such as Logic of English, teach that the schwa sound is only in unaccented syllables and words. Others, such as CLE, seem to teach that any short "u" sound is schwa, such as in "come", "love", etc. Can someone clear this up for me? Right or wrong, I pronounce it the same as a short 'u'. I don't know how else to pronounce it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 I agree. I think it's pronounced the same way. It's just a matter of whether the É™ symbol or the word "schwa" accurately represents the sound in the word "fun" or "love" or if it should only be used for words like "afraid". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 It probably doesn't matter, but it's bothering my OCD :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 LOE would say that "fun" is not schwa. They would also say that "love" is not schwa, but just a schwa-like sound. https://www.logicofenglish.com/blog/60-spelling/389-the-clever-monks-why-o-sometimes-says-short-u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacell Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 https://pronunciationcoach.wordpress.com/2012/12/07/the-sounds-of-u/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Oh, and to further complicated it, LOE says schwa can sound like short "i"! That's a schwi :) Not all native English speakers have a schwi. For people who don't have it, Rosa's and roses are homonyms instead of forming a minimal pair. The schwa is generally understood to be a mid-central vowel. That is, it's formed... well... whatevs, I'll just direct you to Wikipedia. The vowel in "come" or "love" is (for most native speakers, and not discounting the fact that different people have different accents) an open-mid back vowel. You can see on the IPA vowel chart that ə and ʌ are actually fairly close together. That's why the two phonemes sound similar. Which means, since you're teaching your child to read standard English and not IPA (a worthwhile endeavor, certainly, but one with limited scope) that it doesn't really matter if you're using the strictly correct technical terms because nobody cares. Seriously, not even I care that much, and I just made this post on it. Many native speakers don't really hear a clear difference between the "short u" in words such as "about" and the "short u" in words such as "come", though if you say those two words over and over again, carefully and slowly, you may start to feel the different tongue placement as you do so. (You may also find that the words rapidly lose all meaning for you!) I suggest you pick a spelling or reading curriculum, use their terminology, and try not to worry about it. Edited January 25, 2016 by Tanaqui 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Spalding and most of its spin-offs (which includes LOE) do not teach the schwa sound, because in many cases it has more to do with lazy pronunciation than true sounds, if you know what I mean. I don't know how you could say that the u in "fun" is a schwa. :huh: It is the first sound that u makes. Anyway, Spalding teaches children to think to spell, so rather than saying "u-way" they would say "A-way" for spelling, and then possibly "u-way" for speaking. They would also say "love" with the short sound of O rather than "luv," for the same reason, to spell it correctly. In fact, there are people who say "lov" and not "luv," but that doesn't always mean anything, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaquitita Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) nm Edited January 25, 2016 by vaquitita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Oh, and to further complicated it, LOE says schwa can sound like short "i"! I think this would be like the word mountain (?) I have piecemealed our phonics. Some of the info. I got came from LOE, but it was from their website and Doodling Dragons book. I have yet to see the schwa come up in our main language arts program (time4learning) but I use materials from other resources. While I'm sure the list is far from extensive, that wikipedia link has helped me. Edited January 25, 2016 by heartlikealion 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I think this would be like the word mountain (?) Indeed. If you have the schwi, then you would use it in the second syllable of "mountain". At least, I have the schwi, and I believe I do this (man, it can be hard to take apart your own speech!) so let's go with that. Really, I just like using the word schwi. Schwi, schwi, schwi. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momling Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Click here to resolve your IPA vowel questions: http://www.phonetics.ucla.edu/course/chapter1/vowels.html I always think of schwa in the unaccented version of "the". Ellie, schwa is a legitimate sound in English and plenty of other languages. Nothing lazy about it! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Ellie, schwa is a legitimate sound in English and plenty of other languages. Nothing lazy about it! It has not always been a "legitimate" sound. This is addressed in the manual for the Spalding Method, the Writing Road to Reading. The Spalding Method does not teach it because it does not encourage correct spelling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) It has not always been a "legitimate" sound. I don't know when English speakers began automatically reducing unstressed vowels, but words like "legitimate" are completely useless in a discussion of linguistic norms. If native speakers do it, it is correct by default. If all native speakers do it when speaking the prestige dialect - which really does seem to be the case - then you simply do not have a leg to stand on. The Spalding Method does not teach it because it does not encourage correct spelling. There is perhaps a way to teach spelling and reading that does not promote the use of ignorant - not to mention gratuitously judgmental! - assumptions about language. Edited January 25, 2016 by Tanaqui 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I actually taught it as the "lazy" sound. I got that description from a YouTube video and just went with it. I thought it made it easy to teach. I don't think people are being lazy to say "uhbove" (above), but that's just how I describe it. I may or may not have heard the term "schwi" before this thread. I was just throwing all the sounds under the term "schwa" though that may not be correct. As long as my kid can read/speak I don't really care. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I don't know when English speakers began automatically reducing unstressed vowels, but words like "legitimate" are completely useless in a discussion of linguistic norms. If native speakers do it, it is correct by default. If all native speakers do it when speaking the prestige dialect - which really does seem to be the case - then you simply do not have a leg to stand on. There is perhaps a way to teach spelling and reading that does not promote the use of ignorant - not to mention gratuitously judgmental! - assumptions about language. Seriously? Huh. Well, have a nice Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReadingMama1214 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I am honestly baffled by this and feel somewhat silly admitting that I've never heard of the schwa sound. I had to look it up to figure it out and am still somewhat confused. I didn't learn phonics in school and we are only just beginning reading with DD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I am honestly baffled by this and feel somewhat silly admitting that I've never heard of the schwa sound. I had to look it up to figure it out and am still somewhat confused. I didn't learn phonics in school and we are only just beginning reading with DD In English, some syllables are "stressed" and other syllables are "unstressed". Stressed syllables are said a little louder than unstressed syllables. So, to give a few examples, in the word "about", the first syllable is unstressed and the second syllable is stressed. When you say it, it comes out like "uh-BOUT". In the word "boisterously", the first syllable is stressed - "BOI-sterously". In English, unstressed syllables are said a little faster than stressed syllables. Not all languages do this, but English does. And, perhaps because of this feature of English, we generally "reduce" the vowel in unstressed syllables. That's where the schwa comes in. (Or schwi.) For example, in the word "dinosaur", the syllable "no" is unstressed. Say it a few times! "DI-no-saur". Because that syllable is unstressed, the vowel is reduced. For many speakers, this means the word comes out sounding like "di-nuh-sor", where "uh" indicates a schwa. For other speakers, such as myself, it comes out "di-nih-sor", and the "ih" means a schwi. (Same difference, don't worry about it.) We almost never say "di-noe-sor" except in unusual circumstances - say, if we already said the word and the listener went "huh? what did you say?" or if we're shouting into a tornado "THERE! IS! A! DI NO SAUR! ON THE LOOSE!" Weird situations like that :) Oh, and perhaps I should clarify what a "vowel" is. You've heard, I'm sure, that a vowel is "the letters a-e-i-o-u". You may have heard "and sometimes y" or even "and sometimes y or w". However, these letters are not chosen arbitrarily! A vowel sound is a sound we make where we don't stop the airflow at all. So aaaaaaaah is a vowel, because you say it with your mouth wide open. Sssss isn't a vowel, because in order to make that sound you have to slow the airflow a little by putting your tongue at the ridge behind your teeth. T-t-t is definitely not a vowel, because you stop the airflow entirely to make it! Sounds (consonants) like /t/ are even named stops! And you can experiment with various other phonemes (sounds, basically) to work out whether they're vowels or not. English has, I believe, rather a large inventory of vowels (though it varies depending on dialect). 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Sssss isn't a vowel, because in order to make that sound you have to slow the airflow a little by putting your tongue at the ridge behind your teeth. That's interesting. When I say 'sssss', the tip of my tongue is raised and on a level with my bottom teeth, but not touching anything. But then I've also got one of those non-r rs, so my consonants are all messed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I gave this way too much thought. I caught myself doing "sss" both ways. I follow the rule of thumb in the Logic of English book. Vowels are letters you can sing. You know, like hold that note. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I gave this way too much thought. I caught myself doing "sss" both ways. I follow the rule of thumb in the Logic of English book. Vowels are letters you can sing. You know, like hold that note. I would argue that you could sing a rolled 'r' in English. Not that I can roll my 'r'. Not really relevant, but you could sing a Chinese 'r' too, which you make (I was taught) by curving your tongue up and back so that the tip sits up on your palate, further back than the ridge. It's a kind of buzz, a little like a kazoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) I follow the rule of thumb in the Logic of English book. Vowels are letters you can sing. You know, like hold that note. Except then you're stuck with voiced fricatives (/v/, /z/, /zh/) and nasals (/m/, /n/), not to mention approximants such as /r/, /l/, /w/, and /y/. (This isn't using IPA, btw, because I know lots of us can't read it!) That's interesting. When I say 'sssss', the tip of my tongue is raised and on a level with my bottom teeth, but not touching anything. But then I've also got one of those non-r rs, so my consonants are all messed up. Well, if the tip were touching it would stop the airflow. And then you'd have a, well, a stop. Or a nasal, if you continued to push the air through your nose. But the alveolar ridge is definitely the place of articulation (um... the "where the sound is made") for /s/. And also /z/, /t/, /d/, /l/, /r/, and /n/! Edited January 26, 2016 by Tanaqui Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Well, if the tip were touching it would stop the airflow. And then you'd have a, well, a stop. Or a nasal, if you continued to push the air through your nose. But the alveolar ridge is definitely the place of articulation (um... the "where the sound is made") for /s/. And also /z/, /t/, /d/, /l/, /r/, and /n/! I'm odd then. My tongue touches the ridge for all those others, but hovers in mid air for 's' and 'r'. The contact for 'z' is very light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Okay, I have a labiodental approximant 'r'. But I don't know about the 's'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labiodental_approximant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I don't think I'm explaining it effectively here. Also, the title of the book is Uncovering the Logic of English: A Common-Sense Approach to Reading, Spelling, and Literacy so what happens in Chinese or Spanish seems moot. I don't roll any rs in English. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) This might help explain the singing thing better. https://www.logicofenglish.com/blog/52-phonics/382-what-is-a-vowel When I talked about holding a note up thread I meant like if you sang, "dashing through the snoooow" you are hearing and holding the "o" in snow. Kinda hard to do with any of the other letters, KWIM? Edited January 25, 2016 by heartlikealion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 This might help explain the singing thing better. https://www.logicofenglish.com/blog/52-phonics/382-what-is-a-vowel When I talked about holding a note up thread I meant like if you sang, "dashing through the snoooow" you are hearing and holding the "o" in snow. Kinda hard to do with any of the other letters, KWIM? Well, you can do it with voiced nasals or voiced fricatives. Zzzzzzzzzzz! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Well, you can do it with voiced nasals or voiced fricatives. Zzzzzzzzzzz! who wants that for their listening pleasure? I think it is obvious what the author means and this retort is nitpicky. Perhaps said in silliness but still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 It's not obvious to me. A vowel sound is one which has no obstruction of the airflow. There are many phonemes you can "sing" that DO have some obstruction of airflow. This is not difficult to understand. All this talk about "singing" is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerryAtHope Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I have noticed that some curricula, such as Logic of English, teach that the schwa sound is only in unaccented syllables and words. Others, such as CLE, seem to teach that any short "u" sound is schwa, such as in "come", "love", etc. Can someone clear this up for me? A schwa is not just any vowel that says "uh," but specifically the vowel in an unstressed syllable. For a simple definition, check out the "full" definition on Merriam-Webster or (for an even clearer definition) the definition on Dictionary.com. A lot has been and can be written on this topic, but it does seem that CLE is over-generalizing the schwa to any "uh" sound. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 It's not obvious to me. A vowel sound is one which has no obstruction of the airflow. There are many phonemes you can "sing" that DO have some obstruction of airflow. This is not difficult to understand. All this talk about "singing" is. Ok. Well, in my mind it's obvious. If I were standing in front of an auditorium and had to belt out a sound, I would be hard pressed to do, "zzzzz" and be heard. I think most people could agree that in singing, "Do Re Me Fa So La Ti" you hear the second letter carry the note. Take away the vowel and it's nothing to belt out. If this still is not easily understood, I'm sorry. The example of "help" and "hlp" on the link I thought summed up the main gist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) The example of "help" and "hlp" on the link I thought summed up the main gist. Given that English has syllabic L... no, it doesn't? Not that we can shove syllabic L in the middle of a word like that, but we can shove syllabic r in, as in the word /work/, and of course /l/ and /r/ are phonologically very similar (more or less). Edited January 26, 2016 by Tanaqui Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Given that English has syllabic L... no, it doesn't? Not that we can shove syllabic L in the middle of a word like that, but we can shove syllabic r in, as in the word /work/, and of course /l/ and /r/ are phonologically very similar (more or less). You know more than me on these typics. Half of what you say is Greek to me. I'm just trying to understand and explain things on a simple (to me) level with the goal to communicate it to my child. I don't imagine I will ever be discussing syllabic anything. I don't even know what you're talking about and will have to google that to follow along. But with the singing example, it seemed like a fairly easy thing to demonstrate to a child vs. all this talk about air flow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Syllabic l means that some syllables in English do not have a vowel. For example, the last syllable in the word, uh, "syllable" doesn't have a vowel. (Phonetically speaking. Phonologically speaking the vowel is the nucleus of the syllable, so l is the vowel, but let's not confuse the issue.) Likewise, the center of the syllable "work" doesn't have a vowel, and r forms the nucleus of the syllable. The phonemes in that word are /w/, /r/, and /k/. No vowel! (Again, unless you've decided to analyze this differently and consider /r/ the vowel. That is also valid.) When the older girl was young and learning to read, and having trouble, I gave her a list of sounds and explained it like this. When we speak, we must breathe. If you cover somebody's mouth and nose - which you wouldn't want to do for very long! - they can't breathe and can't make any sounds to speak. Some sounds are made with the mouth open, and the air coming from our lungs isn't stopped even a little bit. Other sounds are made with the mouth closed, either a little or a lot. And then we tested it to find out which sounds were consonants and which were vowels. Is /n/ a vowel? No, because the tip of the tongue sits at the bump behind the teeth and forces the air to go out the nose. If you pinch your nose, you can't say it anymore. Is /v/ a vowel? No, because your mouth is a little closed - the top lip sits on the bottom teeth, and the air has to kinda go around. Is /b/ a vowel? No, you have to close your lips all the way to make that sound! How about /ah/? Your tongue isn't touching anything! It's a vowel! How about /o/? Well, you rounded your lips, and you crammed your tongue in the bottom of your mouth. It's a vowel! What about /ee/? Well, your tongue is super close to the roof of your mouth (which is why it's categorized as a close or high vowel - the mouth is about as closed as it can get without being a consonant and, indeed, this vowel is almost identical to the consonant /y/ - which for some reason is in the IPA as /j/. Go fig) and also super far front (about as far front as it can get without being a consonant, once again) but still, the air comes out without being really stopped. So it's a vowel. (Except in English we often diphthong it into being a vowel + the consonant y, because, again, those sounds are super similar. This was actually a problem for both kids when they started spelling, as they kept trying to add that /y/ back into words. They also persistently wrote /tr/ as /chr/, which is phonetically correct, anyway.) It wasn't really that hard for them to understand (I say "them" because her kid sister played along as well, though she wasn't the target). Whereas if I'd tried your explanation and they chose to test it out, they might well have decided that humming is the same as singing (they frequently make this claim, in fact), and since humming is just making /m/ forever, /m/ is a vowel. (Well, it can be a syllable, as in the word "chasm".) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garga Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) I am honestly baffled by this and feel somewhat silly admitting that I've never heard of the schwa sound. I had to look it up to figure it out and am still somewhat confused. I didn't learn phonics in school and we are only just beginning reading with DD I've heard of it but never understood it, never taught it explicitly to the kids, and we're all getting along fine. It's fine that it exists and it's fine that people teach it, but honestly I've found it to be very confusing and it ended up causing my kids more trouble when they tried to learn it than help. ETA: Gosh. I sound like I'm saying it's ok not to teach kids things if we don't feel like it. I don't mean that. I just mean that in the big scope of things, the schwa sound is a tiny part. Sure, you want to teach it to your kids, but in this particular case, it's probably ok if the lessons on the schwa sound aren't perfect and if you're just now getting yourself up to speed on them. Edited January 26, 2016 by Garga 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartlikealion Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Syllabic l means that some syllables in English do not have a vowel. For example, the last syllable in the word, uh, "syllable" doesn't have a vowel. (Phonetically speaking. Phonologically speaking the vowel is the nucleus of the syllable, so l is the vowel, but let's not confuse the issue.) Likewise, the center of the syllable "work" doesn't have a vowel, and r forms the nucleus of the syllable. The phonemes in that word are /w/, /r/, and /k/. No vowel! (Again, unless you've decided to analyze this differently and consider /r/ the vowel. That is also valid.) When the older girl was young and learning to read, and having trouble, I gave her a list of sounds and explained it like this. When we speak, we must breathe. If you cover somebody's mouth and nose - which you wouldn't want to do for very long! - they can't breathe and can't make any sounds to speak. Some sounds are made with the mouth open, and the air coming from our lungs isn't stopped even a little bit. Other sounds are made with the mouth closed, either a little or a lot. And then we tested it to find out which sounds were consonants and which were vowels. Is /n/ a vowel? No, because the tip of the tongue sits at the bump behind the teeth and forces the air to go out the nose. If you pinch your nose, you can't say it anymore. Is /v/ a vowel? No, because your mouth is a little closed - the top lip sits on the bottom teeth, and the air has to kinda go around. Is /b/ a vowel? No, you have to close your lips all the way to make that sound! How about /ah/? Your tongue isn't touching anything! It's a vowel! How about /o/? Well, you rounded your lips, and you crammed your tongue in the bottom of your mouth. It's a vowel! What about /ee/? Well, your tongue is super close to the roof of your mouth (which is why it's categorized as a close or high vowel - the mouth is about as closed as it can get without being a consonant and, indeed, this vowel is almost identical to the consonant /y/ - which for some reason is in the IPA as /j/. Go fig) and also super far front (about as far front as it can get without being a consonant, once again) but still, the air comes out without being really stopped. So it's a vowel. (Except in English we often diphthong it into being a vowel + the consonant y, because, again, those sounds are super similar. This was actually a problem for both kids when they started spelling, as they kept trying to add that /y/ back into words. They also persistently wrote /tr/ as /chr/, which is phonetically correct, anyway.) It wasn't really that hard for them to understand (I say "them" because her kid sister played along as well, though she wasn't the target). Whereas if I'd tried your explanation and they chose to test it out, they might well have decided that humming is the same as singing (they frequently make this claim, in fact), and since humming is just making /m/ forever, /m/ is a vowel. (Well, it can be a syllable, as in the word "chasm".) Ds learned the vowels based on the letters "AEIOU" (sometimes Y) and phonograms. I don't even think I got around to telling him the singing thing because I learned that later. But I may end up bringing that up (either with him or dd later). Less obvious examples of vowel sounds are in our book Doodling Dragons and I made my own flashcards with examples so "i" will include "onion" (y sound) and I've taught that "happy" makes an "e" sound where the y is. We mainly just went through phonogram cards. We didn't play with our mouths for each letter of the alphabet. Humming and singing are different to me and I would matter of factly correct a child if that was an obstacle. But obviously if whatever you do/did works for you, then by all means continue. I'm not here to change what you do. I'm merely citing my own personal go-to rule of thumb for the OP or any other posters to do with as they please. I would probably teach "work" as /wor/ /k/. http://www.thephonicspage.org/Phonics%20Lsns/Resources/letter%20sound%20read%20new%202011.pdf Like "word" on the chart. If I didn't choose to teach it that way, I would teach it as /w/ /or/ /k/ with "or" being an R-controlled phoneme. I don't care if that's right or wrong to you. Really, it's okay if you think it's wrong. We have homemade tiles (based on AAS) that represent phonemes, but I have never made him write his own like with the forward slash. Based on your posts I'd say we spent very little time on syllables compared to you. Most of what you post about would not even come up for debate here. You probably won't see posts by me about IPA anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.