http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aVowels+tag%3aPronunciation+tag%3aAmericanSearch results for 'tag:Vowels tag:Pronunciation tag:American' matching tags 'Vowels', 'Pronunciation', and 'American'en-USXMOD (Build: 3616.28671)http://www.englishforums.com/English/GeneralPronunciationTalkCaught-Bought/2/kpjrl/Post.htm#923318Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:45:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:923318freekarolI thank you all for your effort to help me and of course for your time... I think my questions were answered. Especially a reply by Marvin A. completely answered my questions. What pronunciation to choose depends on what American accent you want to have. If you don&#39;t want to have a certain American accent then the best way to be understood by most Americans is to use pronunciation what most Americans use: the Open back unrounded vowel for all of those words.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HasAnyoneTriedHogeCourseEffortless-English/6/zgkjw/Post.htm#915964Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:03:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:915964elena_osullivanAJ Hoge&#39;s &quot;effortless english&quot; is a waste of money. I made the mistake of buying it for a friend who doesn&#39;t speak much English and she doesn&#39;t even use it. I don&#39;t blame her because it takes a lot of effort to learn with it, and there are much, much better materials available on the internet for free. My friend watched some of his videos wherein he sells his MP3&#39;s and she thought she found the magic answer thanks to AJ. He&#39;s a good salesman but a very mediocre teacher.http://www.englishforums.com/English/AmericanAInCanOrE/klbxh/post.htmSun, 06 Sep 2009 18:23:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:889787dokterjokkebrokIs there a difference in the pronunciation of General American &#39;back&#39; and RP &#39;back&#39;? For example as in: I came back Wednesday. The reason for asking is because my pronouncing dictionary gives the /æ/ intermediate vowel for both General American and Received Pronunciation in words like &#39;back&#39;, &#39;slack&#39;,&#39;bad&#39;, &#39;attack&#39; , etc. But when I listen carefully to how Americans pronounce it, I&#39;d swear it sounds more like /e/. Is that true? Or is something else the case? Thank you in advance! Regards Dokterjokkebrokhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/VowelInModernEnglish/wkkwg/post.htm#720587Thu, 07 May 2009 22:56:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:720587ecossaisThe vowel must always be pronounced the same, since it&#39;s an IPA symbol that describe a sound. IPA symbols don&#39;t change, they are defined that way, and they remain so, so that we can describe some sounds. Hmm... But don&#39;t you think this is a little bit eh...old-fashioned? Let&#39;s see. In older dictionaries (and in many books in linguistic, too) there weren&#39;t made the differences between /ɔ/ and /ɔ:/, /ə/ and /ə:/. But nowadays if you, using broad transcription, describe /ɜ:/ and /ɒ/ as /ə:/ and /ɔ/ your work would seem outdated. I think that not we must adjust to a defined set of IPA symbols but we use it to write phonemes(and phones) of our language properly so we can change one IPA symbol to another, if this set of...http://www.englishforums.com/English/VowelInModernEnglish/wkkwg/post.htm#720496Thu, 07 May 2009 19:48:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:720496kooyeenHi (and welcome to Englishforums Smile), As I know, in modern English the vowel is no more pronounced as... ouch! The vowel must always be pronounced the same, since it&#39;s an IPA symbol that describe a sound. IPA symbols don&#39;t change, they are defined that way, and they remain so, so that we can describe some sounds. What happens is that dictionaries use a set of symbols even if they don&#39;t represent the real pronunciation, so you have a kind of &quot;phonemic transcription&quot;, and not real &quot;phonetic transcriptions&quot;. For example, from a dictionary you can understand that &quot;bug&quot; and &quot;sub&quot; have the same vowel, or that &quot;teacher&quot; and &quot;better&quot; rhyme, but it doesn&#39;t tell...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDoISayThis/wcdmn/post.htmMon, 23 Feb 2009 08:07:57 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:679078askshameerI&#39;m undergoing accent neutralization training. My instructor says that when a word ends with a vowel sound and if the next word starts with a vowel sound, then I&#39;m supposed to add an &quot;r&quot; in between to read that out. I&#39;m a bit confused now. Is this rule only for IPA (International Pronunciation Association)? or is it applicable to American Accent and British Accent? I&#39;m not happy with his explanation. For ex: &quot;idea of&quot; becomes &quot;idea r of&quot; &quot;law and order&quot; becomes &quot;law r andorder&quot; /Sameerhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/HelpAmericanBritEnglishDifferFinal-VowelSoundCarriedFamilies/wccrn/post.htmSun, 22 Feb 2009 18:53:44 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:678585anonymousIs it true that in American English, the final vowel sound in CARRIED, VARIED, SOCIETIES and FAMILIES rhymes with that in FEET whilst in British, it rhymes with that in FIT? My examples above are verbs and nouns that end with an EE sound in their regular form: CARRY, VARY, SOCIETY, FAMILY I&#39;m referring to American English as GaE (General American English) and to British English as RP (Received Pronunciation). thankshttp://www.englishforums.com/English/OrdinarilyTemporarilyMomentarily/hqkjh/post.htm#666332Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:51:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:666332paulI am somewhat confused about the proper British pronunciation of words like &quot;ordinarily&quot;, &quot;temporarily&quot;, and &quot;momentarily&quot;. As I understand it, ... American pronunciation and stress the &quot;a&quot; in these words. What is common and what is considered correct British? Claus I do not think either the Brits or those in the U.S. omit any vowel sound in these words completely. In other words, there are no silent syllables in these words.Theoretically, every syllable in a word is uttered with a &#39;stress level&#39; different from that of the other syllables in the same word. But for practical considerations, we could say, a word with four syllables or more probably has a syllable with a primary stress and...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OrdinarilyTemporarilyMomentarily/hqkjh/post.htm#666309Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:27:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:666309john briggsI am somewhat confused about the proper British pronunciation of words like &quot;ordinarily&quot;, &quot;temporarily&quot;, and &quot;momentarily&quot;. As I understand it, ... use the American pronunciation and stress the &quot;a&quot; in these words. What is common and what is considered correct British? The first thing to state is that the British are amazingly (and probably excessively) tolerant of Americans and American pronunciation. If they ever affect not to understand, they are making a point about cultural imperialism -) It is not so much that the &quot;a&quot; is silent in &quot;ordinary&quot;, &quot;temporary&quot;, and &quot;momentary&quot; as that it is so unstressed as to be practically a schwa. (The preceding vowel is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowOvercomeTongueTiedPronunciation/hkbxk/post.htm#634353Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:32:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:634353django cat <nospam@please>No you wouldn&#39;t. Pronunciation skills training is part of professional ... the &#39;Sounds of American&#39; stress on that particular site. DC I would serously consider sending the student to a vocal coach who could help her to sing on the vowels. ... and vocal cords. Try it... By the way, I think you meant the &quot;right&quot; way - not the &quot;write way&quot;. Well I think the poster behind me meant that, certainly. If the student wanted to waste money they could go to a vocal coach, or they could take ESL/EFL lessons with a competent teacher. DChttp://www.englishforums.com/English/AForeignersQuestionBritish-Pronunciation/hlcdd/post.htm#639346Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:48:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:639346einde o'callaghanHello. I&#39;ve heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in &quot;got&quot; was pronounced in a sort ... where a similar thing could happen, say &quot;pot&quot;, &quot;stop&quot;, etc. I mean I didn&#39;t notice it in Blur&#39;s singer&#39;s speech/singing. I&#39;m not British but I lived in london for a long time. I&#39;m unfamiliar with the song you#re referring to but it&#39;s not unusual for British singers to adopt a pseudo-American pronunciation when singing, e.g. a lot of songs by Mick Jagger. Sometimes this can be quite funny when this accent is mixed with a strong regional accent. Regards, Einde O&#39;Callaghanhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/AForeignersQuestionBritish-Pronunciation/hlcdd/post.htm#639352Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:48:44 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:639352nick waggHello. I&#39;ve heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in &quot;got&quot; was pronounced in a sort ... was Blur, by the way. The sound was not even short, it lasted for some time (because it&#39;s a song). Pronunciation in songs can differ quite a lot from that in ordinary speech, particularly in vowel sounds. And that&#39;s not just with pop songs. I sing with an orchestra and have been taught that certain vowel sounds can not be distinguished as the note gets higher, so we may be instructed to sing &quot;cart&quot; instead of &quot;cut&quot;, for instance. The American influence does mean that since &quot;got&quot; is often followed by another vowel, particularly &quot;a&quot;, the &quot;t&quot;...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AForeignersQuestionBritish-Pronunciation/hlcdd/post.htm#639335Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:39:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:639335matthew huntbachI&#39;ve heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in &quot;got&quot; was pronounced in a sort of ... where a similar thing could happen, say &quot;pot&quot;, &quot;stop&quot;, etc. I mean I didn&#39;t notice it in Blur&#39;s singer&#39;s speech/singing. It just seems to be one of those things - pop songs are sung in an American accent. Perhaps it&#39;s because pop music originated from the USA, or because it&#39;s considered to be more glamorous to sing in an American accent, or because somehow the American accent fits the sound of pop music better. It&#39;s such a convention that people barely notice it and it seems to be done unconsciously. On the whole the British people seem to be remarkably tolerant...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AForeignersQuestionBritish-Pronunciation/hlcdd/post.htmWed, 15 Jun 2005 08:13:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:639322danillaHello. I&#39;ve heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in &quot;got&quot; was pronounced in a sort of American manner, more like in &quot;but&quot;, for example. That was Blur, by the way. The sound was not even short, it lasted for some time (because it&#39;s a song). It&#39;s interesting, how you (the British) feel it. Is it felt to be something alien or just one of the British accents? Also, I didn&#39;t notice any other occurence of such pronunciation with any other words where a similar thing could happen, say &quot;pot&quot;, &quot;stop&quot;, etc. I mean I didn&#39;t notice it in Blur&#39;s singer&#39;s speech/singing. Thank youhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/LosAngeles/hghvq/post.htm#616385Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:29:48 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:616385mark barrattHe already said that the current version supports mid-western=20 American (presumably Caught=3DCot), but that you can edit the=20 pronunciation table on which it is based. This, of course, would be=20 a major undertaking - particularly if you wanted British English,=20 with all the extra vowels - since the definition of almost every=20 word would have to be edited. A more interesting question, to my mind, is: how does the system=20 respond to native speakers? The description of the device leads me to suspect that it might say=20 that native speakers are mispronouncing things - particularly in=20 connected speech, where assimilation is a major factor. =20 Regards, Mark Barratthttp://www.englishforums.com/English/VowelsOfAmericanEnglish/hgzcb/post.htm#615611Mon, 06 Sep 2004 18:29:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:615611mxsmanicWhich do you think is better to learn? The one that doesn&#39;t require Flash. Other than that, it&#39;s up to you. There is no rigid number for the vowels in American English or any other dialect of any language. It all depends on where you draw the line. Instead of learning a fixed set of vowels by rote, look at all the vowels defined for the pronunciation you wish to adopt and then look at their relative importance. Vowels are important when they appear in many minimal pairs or sets; they are less important when they appear in few minimal pairs or sets; and they are unimportant if they don&#39;t appear in any minimal pairs or sets (unless you want to eliminate an accent). Contrasts between /i/ and /I/ are extremely important in...http://www.englishforums.com/English/VowelsOfAmericanEnglish/hgzcb/post.htmMon, 06 Sep 2004 17:14:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:615605ariel alonzo medina v?zquezHi friends, In this link: http://www.uiowa.edu/~acadtech/phonetics/about.html you will see there are 15 vowels in American English. In this link: http://www.ic.arizona.edu/~lsp/IPA/SSAE.html you will see there are 12 vowels in Standard American English. Which do you think is better to learn? Thanks for your comments. Arielhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ThenThanPronunciation/8/lqzcm/Post.htm#999812Thu, 02 Sep 2004 21:15:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:999812evan kirshenbaumI&#39;m always surprised to see California cited as a place ... with. (And yes, I know a lot of native Californians.) Are you sure you can hear the merger, though? I realize you&#39;re a linguist by edumucation, but I think these ... a minimal pair for you in a sentence where the pair occurs, and I don&#39;t think that&#39;s all that usual. Hearing mergers is pretty easy, because it tends to sound &quot;wrong&quot;. Consider all of the non-linguistically-trained people who can hear that Chinese speakers don&#39;t say &quot;L&quot; and &quot;R&quot; correctly. (Of course, they don&#39;t realize that it&#39;s a merger.) What&#39;s hard is hearing a distinction that you don&#39;t have. I&#39;d have to listen carefully to be sure of whether...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThenThanPronunciation/8/lqzcm/Post.htm#999683Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:50:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:999683areffHave you spent much time Out West or up Boston way? I&#39;m always surprised to see California cited as a place where the merger is prevalent, although some people make exceptions ... Angeles area, which are the two places I&#39;m most familiar with. (And yes, I know a lot of native Californians.) Are you sure you can hear the merger, though? I realize you&#39;re a linguist by edumucation, but I think these vowel mergers are hard to catch unless you hit upon something that&#39;s a minimal pair for you in a sentence where the pair occurs, and I don&#39;t think that&#39;s all that usual. Speaking of my own experience, what complicates it is that if you don&#39;t have the merger you have a tendency to hear someone with the merger making...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThenThanPronunciation/4/lqzcm/Post.htm#999019Wed, 01 Sep 2004 11:34:36 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:999019donna richouxDonna Richoux typed thus: That&#39;ll be me. Guilty on all ... that I was saying &quot;Shore&quot;. Or the other way around. Interesting. I cannot understand how &quot;pen&quot; and &quot;pin&quot; could possibly be confused (except perhaps by a South African), and to ... and &quot;porn&quot;, or &quot;Shaw&quot; and &quot;shaw&quot;. pen/pin - totally different pawn/porn, Shaw/shore - homophones Is it this rhotic business again? Yes, I&#39;d say the pawn/porn thing is &quot;rhotic business.&quot; For those of us who are rhotic, &quot;or&quot; is a completely different sound than &quot;aw&quot;, and the pawn/porn of non-rhotic people just happens to illustrate that. I find it interesting that certain combinations *don&#39;t* appear more...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/8/lxmhk/Post.htm#999008Wed, 01 Sep 2004 09:44:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:999008athel cornish-bowden&quot;er&quot; as the I think Athel was talking about a schwa, /@/, as in a common BrE pronunciation of &quot;Ibiza&quot; as /aI&#39;bi:T@/. A non-rhotic British &quot;pronunciation spelling&quot; of that might be &quot;eye-BEETH-er&quot;, with &quot;er&quot; for the schwa. Yes, that&#39;s exactly what I was talking about, and more specifically about an unstressed schwa as in the first vowel of &quot;potato&quot; rather than the longer stressed sound that occurs in words like &quot;fern&quot; (as spoken by a non-rhotic person). Some Americans, including both Donna and Raymond, seem to think of schwa and &quot;short U&quot; as being, in some sense, ... be why &quot;uh&quot; gets used freely for both in American pronunciation spellings,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/9/lxmhk/Post.htm#996350Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:37:25 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996350jonathan jordanI quite understand why rhotic people would find the usual ... in the language where the combination &quot;uh&quot; represents this sound? It makes sense in an odd sort of way. The attempt is to represent /V/, which is probably the accented ... pronounced after a vowel at the end of a word. Viola! I don&#39;t know whether it really happened this way. The problem I have with it is that it conflicts with the use of vowel + in German orthography to indicate a long vowel, so that represents (e:) and (u:). I&#39;m sure I meet this usage more than the American (?) one indicating short vowels. My solution is, in order of preference: 1. Use IPA (or ASCII IPA) 2. Borrow the schwa symbol while otherwise using ordinary letters 3. Use , if confusion...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/6/lxmhk/Post.htm#995860Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:24:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:995860raymond s. wiseI quite understand why rhotic people would find the usual ... in the language where the combination &quot;uh&quot; represents this sound? Good point, &quot;uh&quot; doesn&#39;t really appear in traditional English words, does it? Searching on in Onelook gives a list ... can call meaningful sounds, words) &quot;uh&quot; and &quot;duh&quot; actually use it. &quot;Uh-huh&quot; isn&#39;t quite the same, being a nasal &quot;unh-hunh.&quot; &quot;Uh-oh&quot; has the same vowel sound as &quot;uh,&quot; although it has glottal stops which &quot;uh&quot; does not have. All I can think of is that we got used to that spelling from the sound-spellings that appeared in encyclopedias ... Merope (MER-uh-pee) It&#39;s the standard way that sound is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/DoublePosting/2/lpcdw/Post.htm#993521Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:42:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:993521rzedNot for AmE CINCs they don&#39;t. &quot;Soft&quot; is in the boss class. Short O. This cryptic response is just too terse. Are you denying that what Areff says is true? Or are you merely saying that for you both words have the same sound (and that it does not rhyme with &quot;caught&quot;)? Or are you describing the sound that *does* rhyme with &quot;caught&quot; as the &quot;short O&quot; sound? In my (CINC) speech, &quot;sot&quot; and &quot;soft&quot; use different vowels, and the one in &quot;soft&quot; is the &quot;caught&quot; vowel. I note that the American Heritage Dictionary referenced by OneLook gives two pronunciations (the first uses an o with a circumflex (which I take to be the &quot;caught&quot; sound), the second with a...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/9/lxmhk/Post.htm#993502Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:50:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:993502dcwThe only transcription I&#39;ve seen here of the &quot;correct&quot; American ... English. How do Americans generally pronounce British names containing /A./? Probably with the closest phoneme we have. But there are several. I don&#39;t think we have any strong feelings about which one you should use. While most Brits may lack an /R/, Americans are used to making the mental accent translation. But which one? American /R/ seems to correspond to several British phonemes. What strikes us as &quot;wrong&quot; with the way they say &quot;Packard&quot; is that they use the vowel we&#39;d expect them to use in &quot;card&quot; rather than the vowel we&#39;d expect them to use in &quot;curd&quot; (those are distinguished, right?) Yes: /kA:d/...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/9/lxmhk/Post.htm#992949Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:14:52 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:992949evan kirshenbaumIt seems just a bit stranger in the case of ... on &quot;David Packard of Hewlett-Packard&quot;, how did they do it? The only transcription I&#39;ve seen here of the &quot;correct&quot; American pronunciation of &quot;Packard&quot; contains a phoneme (/R/) absent from most forms of British English. How do Americans generally pronounce British names containing /A./? Probably with the closest phoneme we have. While most Brits may lack an /R/, Americans are used to making the mental accent translation. What strikes us as &quot;wrong&quot; with the way they say &quot;Packard&quot; is that they use the vowel we&#39;d expect them to use in &quot;card&quot; rather than the vowel we&#39;d expect them to use in &quot;curd&quot; (those are...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/13/lxmhk/Post.htm#992818Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:29:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:992818sean o'leathlobhairI can half understand why we don&#39;t say Paree, but why shouldn&#39;t English speaking people be able to sort out ... ard&#39; instead of &#39;Mare lind&#39; (Ok, I can&#39;t do Fontanian symbols) and the &#39;normal&#39; pronunciation of the American company name? I was just doing a little lurking after a few weeks holiday in Thailand and Vietnam but I could not resist replying to this one. I guess that you know that the problem is not all one way. Most English people collapse laughing when Americans talk about &quot;Worcestershire sauce&quot; or ask where &quot;Gloucester&quot; is. Once on an American Airlines flight I attempted to order a tomato juice with Worcestershire sauce (*). I managed to translate &quot;tomato&quot; but...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AnUnscrewableScrew/34/lxkwz/Post.htm#991559Sat, 14 Aug 2004 09:12:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:991559ian nobleRubbish (meant nicely, but). Shades of my old Eng Lit ... gem, but doesn&#39;t fit the scansion. Nothing more, nothing less. Okay, now what about this issue of the pronunciation? Ross implied that the &quot;Lancasheer&quot; pronunciation which Lennon unquestionably uses is ... thought some BrE person here said that some BrEs actually do use a &#39;sheer&#39; pronunciation for certain -shire place names. Over-analysis. The underlying vowel is a short ee. The last note is extended in the line, so the last syllable has to be held too. That pulls it from the (normally very short) &quot;shir&quot; into &quot;sheer&quot;. Pronunciation has nothing to do with it. I&#39;d welcome a suggesting as to how Lennon might have sung it otherwise,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/3/lxmhk/Post.htm#991498Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:44:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:991498r j valentine}&gt; }&gt; I can half understand why we don&#39;t say Paree, but why shouldn&#39;t }&gt; English speaking people be able to sort out the local pronunciations }&gt; of proper nouns in English speaking countries? Why do all English }&gt; people, it seems when I listen to the BBC, pronounce &#39;Maryland&#39; as }&gt; &#39;Mary land&#39; and &#39;Hewlett Packard&#39; as &#39;Hewlett PACK ard&#39; instead of }&gt; &#39;Mare lind&#39; (Ok, I can&#39;t do Fontanian symbols) } } Say what? In New York we pronounce &quot;Maryland&quot; as though it were written } &quot;Merralind&quot; /mEr@l@nd/ &quot;merry&quot; vowel in the first syllable and schwa in } the second. Three syllables. &quot;Merralind&quot; is pretty much how people have...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/3/lxmhk/Post.htm#991176Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:54:18 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:991176areffI can half understand why we don&#39;t say Paree, but why shouldn&#39;t English speaking people be able to sort out ... as &#39;Mary land&#39; and &#39;Hewlett Packard&#39; as &#39;Hewlett PACK ard&#39; instead of &#39;Mare lind&#39; (Ok, I can&#39;t do Fontanian symbols) Say what? In New York we pronounce &quot;Maryland&quot; as though it were written &quot;Merralind&quot; /mEr@l@nd/ &quot;merry&quot; vowel in the first syllable and schwa in the second. Three syllables. Now, granted, most Americans have no Mary/merry distinction, and some, like Sparky and erk, go so far as to include marry in the mix. But until now I hadn&#39;t thought that some Americans pronounce &quot;Maryland&quot; as a *two*-syllable word, &quot;mare-lind&quot;....http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronunciationShoulderL/5/hgrdx/Post.htm#614883Thu, 12 Aug 2004 04:30:38 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:614883mxsmanicAgreed, if such coursebooks claim to be representing American pronunciation. They are incorrect even when representing RP. Apparently length is indeed an inherent part of vowel phonemes in several important British dialects, where /i/ ~ (i:) is in fact longer than /I/ ~ (I). There may be some dialect somewhere that makes phonemic distinctions based on length, but RP does not, nor does GAE. There are other errors in transcriptions as well, such as the persistent tendency to note /E/ as /e/, which is very confusing to people who actually know the IPA (these are two entirely different vowels), and the tendency to note /I/ as /i/ and /i/ as /i:/, which is also incorrect and confusing. Don&#39;t English speakers ever study any other languages...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronunciationShoulderL/5/hgrdx/Post.htm#614878Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:56:39 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:614878jim heckmanOn 11-Aug-2004, Mxsmanic (Email Removed) wrote in message (Email Removed): It is not true for English in Los Angeles, where ... same phonetic length; the difference is almost entirely in quality. I agree; I&#39;ve noticed the same thing in American English, which makes the incorrect phonetic transcriptions used in so many English coursebooks even more misleading. Agreed, if such coursebooks claim to be representing American pronunciation. Apparently length is indeed an inherent part of vowel phonemes in several important British dialects, where /i/ ~ (i:) is in fact longer than /I/ ~ (I). Like other vowels, both do vary in length depending on the surrounding segments, though. Yes, but it&#39;s irrelevant to meaning. Depends on what you...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronunciationShoulderL/5/hgrdx/Post.htm#614819Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:41:55 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:614819mxsmanicIt is not true for English in Los Angeles, where tsj says he is, that &quot;/i/ is usually long and ... pretty sure. /i/ and /I/ here have very nearly the same phonetic length; the difference is almost entirely in quality. I agree; I&#39;ve noticed the same thing in American English, which makes the incorrect phonetic transcriptions used in so many English coursebooks even more misleading. Like other vowels, both do vary in length depending on the surrounding segments, though. Yes, but it&#39;s irrelevant to meaning. Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronunciationShoulderL/3/hgrdx/Post.htm#614704Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:01:30 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:614704jim heckmanOn 10-Aug-2004, Mxsmanic (Email Removed) wrote in message (Email Removed): The length of vowels in English is not phonemic; that is, you can be understood whether you pronounce vowels long ... In English, /i/ is usually long and /I/ is usually short, but they are recognizable not matter what their length. It is not true for English in Los Angeles, where tsj says he is, that &quot;/i/ is usually long and /I/ is usually short&quot;; nor is that so for most American accents, I&#39;m pretty sure. /i/ and /I/ here have very nearly the same phonetic length; the difference is almost entirely in quality. Like other vowels, both do vary in length depending on the surrounding segments, though. A famous example is the relative length before final...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhyWorcesterMispronouncedWooster/17/lkzzr/Post.htm#971838Fri, 06 Aug 2004 09:26:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:971838matti lamprheyIt is not the same discussion when it comes to names. The pronunciation of names is decided by the bearers of the names. There is a well-known surname in England written Cholmondeley but pronounced Chumley. Many people with the surname Menzies pronounce it Mingis and the surname Strachan is frequently pronounced Strawn. Such is the quaintness of English. Sticking with the Wooster context, it seems that &#39;Barmy&#39; Fotheringhay-Phipps had &quot;Fungy&quot; for his middle bit. I was reminded of this when watching an episode from the Fry &amp; Laurie series last night, and I also noticed what I assume was a deliberate exposition of the how-do-we-say-Wooster thing: the only character who used the longer version of the vowel was Pop...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheSkinny/13/lwxnz/Post.htm#965727Sat, 24 Jul 2004 15:16:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965727john lawler^ (= How?) Americans say /ma:m/ (with a relatively long /a:/, since it&#39;s stressed and precedes a voiced nasal). &quot;Mum&quot; is marked as non-American, or very hurried. Is this difference in the pronunciation to be expected? For example, if a phonetician had many samples of our speech ... would pronounce it. Or if he heard one of us then would he be able to predict the other&#39;s form? *Some* difference in pronunciation is to be expected. But which ones is completely unpredictable. While there is variation in the speech pool, there&#39;s no principle of natural selection. Or put another way, does the different spelling reflect a real difference or is it just arbitrary: you kept the written vowel of &quot;mother&quot; and we...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheSkinny/13/lwxnz/Post.htm#965672Sat, 24 Jul 2004 10:50:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965672sean o'leathlobhair^ (= How?) Naw, that&#39;s how Somerset pronounces it. Americans say /ma:m/ (with a relatively long /a:/, since it&#39;s stressed and precedes a ... Nothing in Nature so irksome as general Discourses, especially when they turn chiefly upon Words.&quot; Joseph Addison, Spectator, #267 Is this difference in the pronunciation to be expected? For example, if a phonetician had many samples of our speech but not &quot;mom / mum&quot;, would he be able to predict how we would pronounce it. Or if he heard one of us then would he be able to predict the other&#39;s form? Or put another way, does the different spelling reflect a real difference or is it just arbitrary: you kept the written vowel of &quot;mother&quot; and we respelt to reflect our...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheSkinny/12/lwxnz/Post.htm#965384Fri, 23 Jul 2004 17:17:27 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965384ben zimmer^ (= How?) Naw, that&#39;s how Somerset pronounces it. Americans say /ma:m/ (with a relatively long /a:/, since it&#39;s stressed and precedes a voiced nasal). For those with the &quot;cot&quot;/&quot;caught&quot; merger, the &quot;mom&quot;/&quot;mawm&quot; distinction is equally meaningless. While many North American CICers use a mid-back unrounded vowel for &quot;mom&quot;, others (such as Eastern New Englanders and Canadians) use a low-back rounded vowel, which would sound like &quot;mawm&quot; to CINCers. Based on Penny Eckert&#39;s data, the &quot;mawm&quot; pronunciation may be spreading, as it has become common in Northern California as well: http://www.stanford.edu/~eckert/sounds/mom.wav taken from:...http://www.englishforums.com/English/SpellingSoundsInEnglish/lwwwr/post.htm#962487Mon, 19 Jul 2004 01:54:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:962487areffHow many Americans are aware that the &quot;long &#39;o&#39;&quot;of Received Pronunciation is different from the American &quot;long &#39;o&#39;&quot;? Some American accents have a &quot;long &#39;o&#39;&quot; that is similar to the &quot;long &#39;o&#39;&quot; of RP. How &#39;bout Philadelphia/South Jersey? There&#39;s also the question of the Esperanto &quot;a&quot;: It can be the &quot;ah&quot; of &quot;are,&quot; /A/, or the sound /a/, ... the beginning of the diphthongs &quot;eye, /aI/, and &quot;ow,&quot; /aU/. (Again, I don&#39;t know whether this agrees with the Fundamento.) What do you mean &quot;/a/ ... does not exist in American English&quot;? How would you notate the &quot;father&quot; vowel of Eastern New England accents?...http://www.englishforums.com/English/SpellingSoundsInEnglish/lwwwr/post.htm#962481Mon, 19 Jul 2004 01:21:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:962481raymond s. wiseI stopped reading Katherine Kerr when the same mistake was perpetuated in her 3rd or 4th book: she gave &#39;thin&#39; ... of an o - I like to call it a smiley - so %u means a smiley over the u. That diacritic is called a &quot;breve&quot; in English. Begin quote: There are no silent letters; every word word is pronounced as it isspelled. Vowels are sounded ah, eh, ... be people for whom &#39;prince&#39; and &#39;prints&#39; are homophones, but I still think &#39;prints&#39; would have been a better example. I agree. MWCD11 has for the pronunciation of &quot;prince&quot; &quot;&#39;prin(t)s&quot;. Something like &quot;hats&quot; would be better. I can&#39;t think of an imported German word where most English speakers would say the z as...http://www.englishforums.com/English/LostDisplacedBriticisms/59/hhvpc/Post.htm#958376Wed, 14 Jul 2004 21:03:24 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958376pat durkinI wonder if there are any speakers of a variety ... the &quot;Ef&quot; pronunciation. Is he from Scotland or somewhere nearthere? I don&#39;t know, but I still want to know what that ferocious-sounding interjection is that all the MPs utter whenever ... ... House of Commons: NYAAAH! NYAAAH! NYAAAH! We don&#39;t have the word &quot;NYAAAH!&quot; in American political English, you see. In theater- and perhaps movie-speak, rather than to have extras memorize particular lines to emulate crowd-speak, there appear to be a couple of words given to the to say repeatedly, all the while doing various stage business (businesses?). I think &quot;bridge&quot; is one of them. I think mumble and mutter and the like are too indistinct to yield a...http://www.englishforums.com/English/LostDisplacedBriticisms/59/hhvpc/Post.htm#958351Wed, 14 Jul 2004 20:26:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958351areffI wonder if there are any speakers of a variety of BrE who has created an initialism for the phenom ... in London). It was the Speaker who consistently used the &quot;Ef&quot; pronunciation. Is he from Scotland or somewhere near there? I don&#39;t know, but I still want to know what that ferocious-sounding interjection is that all the MPs utter whenever the Prime Minister says anything. E.g.: Tory Blair: No one lied. No one made up the intelligence ... House of Commons: NYAAAH! NYAAAH! NYAAAH! We don&#39;t have the word &quot;NYAAAH!&quot; in American political English, you see. But seriously, I&#39;ve noticed many British speakers of various dialectal stripes lowering /I/ to /E/. Some Americans do a similar thing. Tory Blair himself is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/LostDisplacedBriticisms/59/hhvpc/Post.htm#957929Wed, 14 Jul 2004 20:11:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:957929pat durkinI wonder whether he&#39;s a BrE, say, who is hearing some particular American accent&#39;s /E/ realization as an /i/. PIPs, for example, will say &quot;semi&quot; in a way that might sound like &quot;simmy&quot; or &quot;simm-eye&quot; to PINPs. I wonder if there are any speakers of a variety of BrE who has created an initialism for the phenom of &quot;effing&quot; in place of &quot;iffing&quot;. The thought occured to me while watching the PM speaking to the House of Commons this morning (or PM in the pm, in London). It was the Speaker who consistently used the &quot;Ef&quot; pronunciation. Is he from Scotland or somewhere near there? Does that vowel shift occur with other following consonants, or is it limited, as Richard&#39;s appears...http://www.englishforums.com/English/SecsSoundSoundsLikeSex/3/lgnmb/Post.htm#953416Thu, 08 Jul 2004 16:14:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:953416pat durkinI would also use the same vowel in Juan and ... would train my colleagues by failing to respond to &quot;one&quot;. I think the usual pronunciation of &#39;Juan&#39; in AmE is h-less, because the name has become so naturalized. Or, rather, ... AmE speakers who distinguish &#39;which&#39; from &#39;witch&#39; would say /hwAn/. To me, /hwAn/ sounds sort of pretentious, so to say. Having an aunt named Juanita( with a wh- or hw-, if you will) but I am one who says which when I mean which and whether when I mean whether and not witch, wen, weather), I must request that you moderate your characterization about pretentiousness. Of course I have met at least one lady named (spelled) Waneeta. I believe she was Native American, but the Spanish...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/8/lgdph/Post.htm#951055Thu, 01 Jul 2004 22:42:43 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:951055dylan nicholsonYes, but why do American dictionaries choose *my* pronunciation oversomeone from Alabama, or Massachusetts, or Wisconsin? There are glaring anddrastic differences in pronunciation from region to region. Not sure if this helps, but from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinguishing accents in English United States of America (See also American English; North American English) The standard American English accent is the neutral dialect spoken by TV network announcers and typical of educated speech in the Upper Midwest, Chicago, Minneapolis/St. Paul and Philadelphia. Standard American makes a good reference dialect because it has crisp consonants and more vowel distinctions than other major dialects, tends to retain distinctions between...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/7/lgdph/Post.htm#951007Thu, 01 Jul 2004 20:40:36 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:951007aaron j. dinkinYes, but why do American dictionaries choose *my* pronunciation over someone from Alabama, or Massachusetts, or Wisconsin? There are glaring and drastic differences in pronunciation from region to region. There are, certainly. But, as I said elsewhere, American dictionaries can ignore the systematic differences. The class of words in which you say (E) is essentially the same as the class of words in which someone from Tuscaloosa says (Ej@) or someone from Flint says (V&quot;) (or whatever the most extreme Northern Cities version of that vowel is), and the exceptions to that are themselves mostly systematic. So all the dictionary needs to indicate is that such-and-such a word contains the same vowel as &quot;pet&quot;, and you can do the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/7/lgdph/Post.htm#950918Thu, 01 Jul 2004 17:04:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:950918don a. gilmoreWell, because American dictionaries typically don&#39;t give strict phonetic prescriptions; rather, the pronunciation descriptions given by American dictionaries are generally ... same vowel as &quot;pet&quot; and &quot;get&quot;, and that is as true in the South as it is in Kansas City. My point was that it is pronounced with two syllables in some regions of the south. This is a major difference. Don Kansas Cityhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/7/lgdph/Post.htm#950915Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:57:51 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:950915aaron j. dinkinI don&#39;t necessarily agree with this. &quot;Dictionaries describe the most *usual* pronunciation&quot;?? What does &quot;most usual&quot; mean? The densest and ... There are a great many people in the South that pronounce &quot;help&quot; as &quot;HEY-ulp&quot;...why isn&#39;t that included in the dictionary? Well, because American dictionaries typically don&#39;t give strict phonetic prescriptions; rather, the pronunciation descriptions given by American dictionaries are generally of a phonemic type, which indicate how a word fits into the pattern of sounds within a given accent. So what the dictionary indicates is that &quot;help&quot; is pronounced with essentially the same vowel as &quot;pet&quot; and &quot;get&quot;, and that is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/3/lgdph/Post.htm#950598Thu, 01 Jul 2004 10:23:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:950598bob cunninghamA good online source for BrE phonetics is Cambridge Advanced Learner&#39;s Dictionary at , which uses IPA. A feature that I find interesting in the Cambridge Advanced Learner&#39;s Dictionary is that it gives using IPA both British and US pronunciations of most words. The American pronunciations are of interest to an American not because they tell the American how to pronounce the words, but because they reveal what pronunciations Cambridge lexicographers *think* are most typical. While you&#39;re looking up a word on a page of the CALD , you can click on &quot;American English&quot; and get the same word in the Cambridge Dictionary of American English . When I compare the two dictionaries&#39; entries for &quot;wrought&quot;,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowDictionariesPronounce/2/lgdph/Post.htm#950572Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:29:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:950572jonathan jordan&#39;Round here we use /@/ for a schwa; /&amp;/ is ... consider the pronunciation too obvious to wasteink and paper on. A good online source for BrE phonetics is Cambridge AdvancedLearner&#39;s Dictionary at , which uses IPA.For &quot;carver&quot;, they have /&#39;kA:v@(superscript r)/. The superscript r isthe &quot;linking r&quot; of non-rhotic BrE, only pronounced before a followingvowel. Why do you consider this a good source? If you look up its pronunciations of &quot;bath&quot; and &quot;hearth&quot;, you will see that they are shown as rhyming. Some different pronunciations (which happen to reflect the way that I say the words rather better) are shown, but they are marked as &quot;US&quot;. I&#39;m not American. On the...