http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aVowels+tag%3aPronunciation+tag%3aSpeechesSearch results for 'tag:Vowels tag:Pronunciation tag:Speeches' matching tags 'Vowels', 'Pronunciation', and 'Speeches'en-USXMOD (Build: 3616.28671)http://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseAnswerMyQuery/lqzpp/post.htm#999093Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:18:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:999093gleb_chebrikoffDear friend, glides are sounds produced with little or no obstruction of the airstream that are preceded or followed by a vowel. If they are followed by vowels, they are called on-glides , as in woo, where /w/ is an on-glide. If these sounds are preceded by vowels, they are termed off-glides , all English diphthongs include them: /ʊ/ in cow is one example. Some linguists use the terms you inquire about in a sharply different way. Thus, according to some of them, glides are terms used in phonetics to refer to the auditory effect of articulatory movement at points of transition between sounds. An off-glide is a movement which occurs as the vocal organs leave the position taken up by one speech sound and travel towards the position...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's an IPA symbol that describe a sound. IPA symbols don'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't represent the real pronunciation, so you have a kind of "phonemic transcription", and not real "phonetic transcriptions". For example, from a dictionary you can understand that "bug" and "sub" have the same vowel, or that "teacher" and "better" rhyme, but it doesn't tell...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhatIsASyllable/wzgjx/post.htm#694638Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:15:41 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:694638danielrams07syllable Segment of speech usually consisting of a vowel with or without accompanying consonant sounds (e.g., a , I , out , too , cap , snap , check ). A syllabic consonant, like the final n sound in button and widen , also constitutes a syllable. Closed (checked) syllables end in a consonant, open (free) syllables in a vowel. Syllables play an important role in the study of speech and in phonetics and phonology . girl have 1 go have 1 rain 2 famous 2 hour 1 double 2 prison 2 A syllable is a basic unit of written and spoken language. It is a unit consisting of uninterrupted sound that can be used to make up words. For example, the word hotel has two syllables: ho and tel . These will be marked here as in ho/tel . Counting Syllables ...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TrySayingTheAlphabet/2/hnwzk/Post.htm#650978Sat, 08 Nov 2008 08:23:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:650978peter grovesNative speakers of English don't, unless dictating to children. In ... or "handbag" (which in rapid speech is indistinguishable from "ham-bag"). I'm English and have just a vestige of a "d" in handsome and a subdued but audible one in sandwich, but a full one in handbag (hand-bag). If you utter a fully released /d/ in "handbag" (hand-bag) you're using a spelling pronunciation, which is normally a result of the word in question going out of daily use. I'm English too, but I live in Australia and while my students don't say "cup-board" because they use the word on a daily basis, they do say "waist-coat", "boat-swain", "grind-stone" and...http://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've heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in "got" was pronounced in a sort ... where a similar thing could happen, say "pot", "stop", etc. I mean I didn't notice it in Blur's singer's speech/singing. I'm not British but I lived in london for a long time. I'm unfamiliar with the song you#re referring to but it'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'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've heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in "got" was pronounced in a sort ... was Blur, by the way. The sound was not even short, it lasted for some time (because it's a song). Pronunciation in songs can differ quite a lot from that in ordinary speech, particularly in vowel sounds. And that'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 "cart" instead of "cut", for instance. The American influence does mean that since "got" is often followed by another vowel, particularly "a", the "t"...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AForeignersQuestionBritish-Pronunciation/hlcdd/post.htm#639335Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:39:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:639335matthew huntbachI've heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in "got" was pronounced in a sort of ... where a similar thing could happen, say "pot", "stop", etc. I mean I didn't notice it in Blur's singer's speech/singing. It just seems to be one of those things - pop songs are sung in an American accent. Perhaps it's because pop music originated from the USA, or because it'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'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've heard (say, in some British songs) the following pronunciation: the vowel in "got" was pronounced in a sort of American manner, more like in "but", for example. That was Blur, by the way. The sound was not even short, it lasted for some time (because it's a song). It'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't notice any other occurence of such pronunciation with any other words where a similar thing could happen, say "pot", "stop", etc. I mean I didn't notice it in Blur's singer's speech/singing. Thank youhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ShakespearesPronunciation/4/hjpkj/Post.htm#634080Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:21:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:634080phil c.As someone living in Northern Ireland, the most accurate comment ... over the centuries by migrants from England, Scotland, and Wales. However, there are identifiable features which are common in speech across Northern Ireland. Those of us with some familiarity with ... hasn't had the great shift in pronunciation of vowels that has taken place particualrly in south-eastern English since Elizabethan times. It just sounds to me like something from a publicity handout by the Belfast Tourist Board but perhaps I'm cynical. Phil C.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ShakespearesPronunciation/4/hjpkj/Post.htm#634074Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:15:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:634074matthew huntbachI read somewhere that if you want to hear Shakespeare's ... should see a performance by a Northern Irish/Belfast theatre company. As someone living in Northern Ireland, the most accurate comment I can make on the correctness of this assertion is ... Different accents and varieties of English have been brought here over the centuries by migrants from England, Scotland, and Wales. However, there are identifiable features which are common in speech across Northern Ireland. Those of us with some familiarity with accents don't find it to detect from their speech when someone comes from the province. I guess what was really meant is that Northern Irish speech has kept some features of English which have changed in English as spoken in...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronounciationMeaning/3/hhbjr/Post.htm#619657Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:36:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:619657cybercypherEnrico C wrote on 21 Nov 2004: One can always record one's own speech and compare it with a native speaker's rendition. On the contrary, I think one can improve a lot if others listen to him/her attentively and make him/her notice ... change the sound, even better if they can explain where their tongue exactly is when they utter a certain sound. Sure, but that's not terribly practical in most EFL classes. I do spend a bit of time on trying to teach my Taiwanese students that they have to close their lips to pronounce an (m), but most of them just pronounce words like "time" as (tain) instead of (taim). That's why I I don't think it's just an individual problem, as I noticed there are common issues for...http://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/AddressAndCity/8/lpxvg/Post.htm#996955Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:17:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996955areffI know he does, but I'm afraid to say that ... 'Avenue' in New York City dialects gets the lax vowel. Yes. I confess that it took me a long time to understand what the lax/tense split was all about, despite the fact that it had always been a feature of my speech. You can see the confusion in that posting I really didn't know what I was talking about (I mean, more than usual). And it *is* difficult to hear in PNYPS especially because the distance between the two vowels isn't as great as it might be in other New York dialects, plus you have those troublesome quantum pronunciation effects.http://www.englishforums.com/English/NoDInMySpeech/8/lpxbv/Post.htm#996852Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:24:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996852mark barrattThe explanation (which I find convincing, but your mileage may vary) is that the puff of air is *unvoiced*, whereas all vowels are, by definition, voiced to some extent. If you try the hand-over-mouth experiment with the word "peak", for example, you should notice that the puff of air actually precedes the /i:/ sound. Compare an instance where /p/ is not usually aspirated, such as the word "speak", and you should be able to understand the difference between an aspirated and an unaspirated plosive. I now find that the Pulmonic Consonants table of the International Phonetic Association has no mention of "aspirate". There's an ... you have to look at the diacritics, where a raised "h" to the right...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Pooberty/11/lpxch/Post.htm#996587Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:38:12 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996587bob cunninghamOn 28 Aug 2004 08:35:31 -0700, R H Draney Jon Miller filted: * I assume Sara meant to write "pooberty" there. I've never had much occasion to use the word, but it would not have occurred to me to pronounce it any other way than ('pu:b@rti:) ("pooberty"). Now that I'm alerted, though, I'll be listening to see if I hear anyone pronouncing it another way. The (pu:) ("poo") pronunciation is common enough for Webster's Third New International Dictionary ( W3NID ) to show it as an alternative, albeit tagged with "sometimes". By the way, note that by itself the pronunciation spelling "poo" is at least ambiguous. "oo" can be as in "food" or "good"...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PlaceNamePronunciations/8/lxmhk/Post.htm#995957Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:31:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:995957ben zimmerI quite understand why rhotic people would find the usual ... in the language where the combination "uh" represents this sound? Good point, "uh" doesn't really appear in traditional English words, does it? Searching on in Onelook gives a list ... can call meaningful sounds, words) "uh" and "duh" actually use it. "Uh-huh" isn't quite the same, being a nasal "unh-hunh." Some might pronounce "uh-huh" and "uh-uh" as (V'hV) and (V'V) respectively, i.e., with the same vowel as "uh". (OED2 dates those forms to 1924, by the way.) I was surprised that the earliest OED2 cite for "uh" as a hesitation particle only comes from 1962 (as...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't. "Soft" 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 "caught")? Or are you describing the sound that *does* rhyme with "caught" as the "short O" sound? In my (CINC) speech, "sot" and "soft" use different vowels, and the one in "soft" is the "caught" 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 "caught" sound), the second with a...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhyWorcesterMispronouncedWooster/12/lkzzr/Post.htm#970222Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:41:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:970222alan jonesAlan Jones wibbled A local oddity is Calne: older natives use the 'a' ... say "kahn", presumably on the model of "calm" and "palm". Hmmm, I use the a of 'calm' but pronounce the l. Taught by a local. That may well be more "correct". The vowel I hear as the 'a' of "bat" is perhaps just the more rural version of 'ah'. As an incomer, I learned local pronunciations from the craftsmen building my bungalow, especially Mick (tiling, slabs etc.) whose ripe accent matched his intimate knowledge of the Devizes-Chippenham-Calne part of Wiltshire and its history. Another town nearby is Chippenham (chip-n'm in casual speech) which ... with the town of which Cepen...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheSkinny/13/lwxnz/Post.htm#966001Sun, 25 Jul 2004 08:11:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:966001sean o'leathlobhair^ (= How?) Is this difference in the pronunciation to be expected? For ... then would he be able to predict the other'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's no principle of natural selection. Or put another way, does the different spelling reflect a ... vowel of "mother" and we respelt to reflect our pronunciation? Sorry, I was not very clear. Let's forget the written form completely for a moment. If a phonetician interviewed the two of us, I would expect that he would find some patterns e.g. "When John says (abc), Seán says (xyz)" and he could start to guess my pronunciation from yours...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's stressed and precedes a voiced nasal). "Mum" 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'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'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 "mother" 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's how Somerset pronounces it. Americans say /ma:m/ (with a relatively long /a:/, since it's stressed and precedes a ... Nothing in Nature so irksome as general Discourses, especially when they turn chiefly upon Words." 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 "mom / mum", 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'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 "mother" and we respelt to reflect our...http://www.englishforums.com/English/LostDisplacedBriticisms/64/hhvpc/Post.htm#958374Wed, 14 Jul 2004 21:01:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958374alan jonesI wonder whether he's a BrE, say, who is hearing ... way that might sound like "simmy" or "simm-eye" to PINPs. I wonder if there are any speakers of a variety of BrE who has created an initialism for the phenom ... vowel shift occur with other following consonants, or is it limited, as Richard's appears to be, to one consonant only. Yes, the Speaker is Scottish, and has a pronounced Glaswegian accent. Tony Blair has an oddity of pronunciation in his consistent use of a schwa in unstressed syllables where other speakers of RP or near-RP, or even "Estuary", use a distinct vowel. So "ended" becomes /End@d/ instead of /EndId/ (sorry if I should have used ( ) rather than / /). I don't know...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/NotAboutCienfuegos/4/lzqcw/Post.htm#949204Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:15:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949204aaron j. dinkinIt seems pretty clear to me that Richard means that ... would prefer to spell as "aw" rather than as "ah". Why he would want to spell it "aw" passes understanding, since he has also implied that "aw" may be a low back vowel. I don't think I get your point. Isn't your merged "ah"/"aw" a low back vowel? It's not true at all that he's saying nothing. He's ... his own ear interprets a particular vowel in your speech). I'm not a mind-reader. I don't know how his ear interprets anything. That's why he tells you. And telling me that his ear interprets a sound as "aw" tells me nothing unless I can associate a useful ... himself if anyone,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotAboutCienfuegos/3/lzqcw/Post.htm#949151Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:31:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949151bob cunninghamIf you say that to me, you say nothing. As a description of a sound, "aw" has no useful meaning. It seems pretty clear to me that Richard means that your "ah" sounds like a vowel that, if he himself said it, he would prefer to spell as "aw" rather than as "ah". Why he would want to spell it "aw" passes understanding, since he has also implied that "aw" may be a low back vowel. If "aw" means anything as a pronunciation, it means the pronunciation dictionaries, both British and American, give for words spelled with "aw", and that is (O) or (O:). (It also seems pretty clear to me that when he says "we" and "us" in the quotes sentence, he...http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotAboutCienfuegos/3/lzqcw/Post.htm#949131Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:00:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949131rzedIf you say that to me, you say nothing. As a description of a sound, "aw" has no useful meaning. It seems pretty clear to me that Richard means that your "ah" sounds like a vowel that, if he himself ... speech), but he is giving nonzero information (namely, the way his own ear interprets a particular vowel in your speech). Given the current state of technology, it seems that Bob's argument can be addressed by other means. There are online dictionaries that have audio pronunciation of their words, including both "aw" and "ah". When I listen to the Webster's online versions for those two words, I hear the sounds I am referring to when I use those spellings to describe the sounds. To find out...http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotAboutCienfuegos/3/lzqcw/Post.htm#948953Wed, 30 Jun 2004 11:23:41 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:948953aaron j. dinkinIndeed, that's what we CINCs have been saying all along: your "ah" sounds like "aw" to us. If you say that to me, you say nothing. As a description of a sound, "aw" has no useful meaning. It seems pretty clear to me that Richard means that your "ah" sounds like a vowel that, if he himself said it, he would prefer to spell as "aw" rather than as "ah". (It also seems pretty clear to me that when he says "we" and "us" in the quotes sentence, he means 'I' and 'me'.) It's not true at all that he's saying nothing. He's not giving information of the kind you may want to be given (namely, phonetic description of a particular vowel in...http://www.englishforums.com/English/NotAboutCienfuegos/2/lzqcw/Post.htm#948608Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:29:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:948608areffI think all of your cot/caught vowels sound like normative CINC AmE "aw". Suddenly you're throwing around this word "normative", which means about the same as "prescriptive". No one can be rightfully prescribing (normatizing?) a pronunciation of the vowel in "caught" or "cot". I guess it's true that I've been misusing "normative". I really mean "positive", or "descriptive in the Ray Wisean sense". I think there's a set of "aw"s out there that are considered preferable in educated American speech. For many such speakers the vowel will be a low back vowel, perhaps with little or no rounding. You seem to be implying that people who...http://www.englishforums.com/English/GershwinSaysErstersBaloney/17/lzmnw/Post.htm#947459Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:11:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:947459aaron j. dinkinIf I want you to use the vowel of your ... order to accomplish that? What would you suggest I write? Before I made a suggestion, I would want to be persuaded that there was some good reason for you to want me to use a vowel when you don't know what that vowel is. Because your dialect has a coherent system, consistent with itself, and - given that I know it's a dialect of English - I can be pretty sure it has at least one vowel in a particular class, and indicate it even if I don't know exactly which vowel it is. If I write a word in an ad-hoc pronunciation spelling (without further specification), it's because I want you to pronounce it in a way that is coherent and consistent with that system. I don't want you to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/FatherDifferentTwist/4/lzjvd/Post.htm#947335Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:07:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:947335pat durkinIn my kind of talk, in the sense you mention, ... clearly, a schwa replaces the vowel. "I k'n gowith you". Do you have the "pin"/"pen" merger? (If so, where are you from?) If youdo, your "kin" pronunciation of 'be able' "can" should fall into the samecategory as Joe's and my "ken". No, I am not PIP. This appears, in my local usage to be rather sporadic and unsystematized. I don't say "pinny" for "penny". I am lifelong Wisconsin resident. However, I have commented in one or two earlier threads upon the many/minnie any/inny sound shift. I can't remember other words with that sound shift I mentioned. I believe I brought in the just/jist...http://www.englishforums.com/English/GershwinSaysErstersBaloney/lzmnw/post.htm#947208Mon, 28 Jun 2004 12:38:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:947208areff"Ersters" is definitely rhoticized in the Fred and Ginger version. I guess I was too tired to waffle, and I suppose it's possible that the Gershwins really did mean something ... they couldn't spell otherwise, something like "oosters" with the short oo, and the singers read it off the page rhotically. I don't think so. By that time the er/oi merger was a characteristic of the comical "Brooklynese". In reality this may have been an (V"I) merger. (V"I) isn't the same as (V"). But it's also likely that by this time New York "non-rhotic" speakers were mostly rhotic-in-fact wrt stressed /R/ in such words as "bird". Possibly many of those speakers were using...http://www.englishforums.com/English/FatherDifferentTwist/3/lzjvd/Post.htm#947205Mon, 28 Jun 2004 12:23:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:947205areffFonzie, might I convince you to help me raise objections to linguists' blithe and insulting decision to use the word "Philadelphia" to refer to the entire Upper Chesapeake pronunciation region? You think I don't know? I tell them a million times. They won't listen! I found it shocking when Mr. Dinkin recently seemed to suggest that there was no Baltimore dialect distinct from Philadelphia. That reminds me of the bogus claims by linguists that there are no regional intra-New-York-City accent differences, which everyone knows is untrue. If Brooklyn and Queens have distinct accents, why not Philly and Balto.? If Baltimore is just Philadelphia, what of Laurel? (Actually, where I come from we have enough Southern in us...http://www.englishforums.com/English/FatherDifferentTwist/3/lzjvd/Post.htm#947057Mon, 28 Jun 2004 01:25:33 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:947057areffTo me American pronunciations of "cot" generally sound either a ... of an American accent has something close to my "cat". I have a typical American accent. When you listen to my pronunciation of "caught" which is the same as my pronunciation of "cot" in my recording at http://www.alt-usage-english.org/archive/bc both2.wav , do you really think anyone would say "cat" that way? I'm not altogether sure you do have a "typical" American accent, but then I'm not sure if there is such a thing (and even if there is, I'm not sure what Jonathan Jordan thinks of as a typical American accent). One feature of your accent that, in particular, I find atypical is your relatively...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Pronunciation/2/kqcvz/Post.htm#917179Mon, 24 May 2004 02:22:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:917179steve hayesNo, but there are some who pronouce both "cot" and ... help him by suggesting the Zulu word "ithole" - "calf". That's a separate issue, innit? The vast majority of Americans use the "cat" vowel (phonemically speaking) in "calf", while many ... which appears to be a British approximation of AmE "diner" or "greasy spoon" or (New YorkE) "coffeeshop", sans Greek proprietors. I use the same vowel in "cart", "father" and "calf" Some Americans seem to me to use the same vowel in "caught" and "cot" as well, hence the association. The American was speaking rapidly? Was he from New York (Home of the Fastest Talking...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Herb/7/kqrrg/Post.htm#916312Sun, 23 May 2004 17:18:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:916312areffOddly, you seem to have failed to address the speech features of a number of former Chicago Residents Alienated Pentagonically (CRAP, preferably pronounced "creeap"). How do Donald Rumsfeld, Sy Hersh and Bob Woodward sound to you? I'm not sure I've heard Sy Hersh's voice yet. "Baaab" Woodward has a painfully strong Upper Midwestern Northern Cities Vowel Shifted accent (NTTAWWT), and in fact I find it somewhat difficult to take him seriously as a journalist for that reason (NTIPOTF). Woodward's accent seems to me more emblematically NCVS than specifically Chicagoan, for whatever reason (for example, I don't hear much if any of the tell-tale Pavlovian Salivariness that is the marker of true Chicago...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Pronunciation/2/kqcvz/Post.htm#916211Sun, 23 May 2004 13:00:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:916211areffThere aren't any English speakers (in the US or elsewhere) who merge cot, caught, *and* cart, are there? No, but there are some who pronouce both "cot" and "caught" in the same way that non-rhotic spreakers pronounce "cart", ... stopped, and asked "What's a caff?". I was able to help him by suggesting the Zulu word "ithole" - "calf". That's a separate issue, innit? The vast majority of Americans use the "cat" vowel (phonemically speaking) in "calf", while many English dialects rooted in or otherwise affiliated with certain southern Englandish dialects use the "father" vowel in "calf". IOW, Americans rhyme "calf" and...http://www.englishforums.com/English/EnglishChildrenReadingLearning/5/kklnr/Post.htm#891457Sat, 24 Apr 2004 23:18:40 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:891457robert bannisterI was watching an old Doris Day - Rock Hudson film last night. Doris clearly said "lye-lock" for "lilac", but I suppose she was German. The *Cambridge Dictionary of American English.* shows that to be one of the pronunciations for "lilac," as does MWCD11. Two British-English dictionaries do not have that variant: the *Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary* and *The Collins English Dictionary.* The problem being: how do Americans pronounce 'o'? Please don't answer that as we have multiple threads covering most of aue history on the subject. The point was, Ms Day had a very BrE 'o' sound which sounded odd to me. I suppose the second vowel of 'lilac' has, for me, a shwa, but...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AustralianVowelsZoo/2/khznk/Post.htm#880978Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:34:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:880978mike lyleLarry G infrared: I was watching "the Croc Hunter" the other day and ... to tackle an IPA, or other, representation of that one? I see you're not getting any responses from Australians in this thread. The problem is that our own pronunciation sounds ... like (zV"Uw). I can say this much: I would feel deeply insulted if anyone thought I spoke like Steve Irwin. As an expat, I find that Australian speech has changed a lot over the years. The tendency to glide in extra vowels mentioned in the case of Steve Urwin's "zoo" is a conspicuous example: some people's realisation of the word "no" now often seems to contain three successive vowel-sounds. In my youth it contained barely two! Mike.http://www.englishforums.com/English/AustralianVowelsZoo/2/khznk/Post.htm#874548Fri, 09 Apr 2004 17:58:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:874548rich walesI can say this much: I would feel deeply insulted if anyone thought I spoke like Steve Irwin. The most distinctive feature I've noticed in Steve Irwin's speech (compared to other Australians I've known and heard) is that his /a/ sound has noticeably tense, rounded lips. This also applies to his pronunciation of the /aI/ diphthong making the pronoun "I", in his dialect, sound almost like "oy" from a North American perspective. I could easily imagine a caricature of Steve Irwin saying some- thing like, "Oy'd give moy loyf for moy crawcodoyles!" :-} I have no idea if this particular feature sticks out in Steve Irwin's speech as perceived by other Australians. (Peter, what do you think?) Rich...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Spectrograms/jmzdz/post.htm#813029Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:49:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:813029evan kirshenbaumI've been noodling around the net but there's too much for me to take in. I'm interested in knowing how ... on aue had a spectrogram made of them saying 'mary merry marry' how similar and how different might they look? When I took Phonology in about 1983, the prof discussed their use in court. Essentially, there are sufficient differences between speakers that it is often trivial to take two spectrograms of the same sentence (say one off a recording and one given by the defendent) and say confidently "These were not made by the same person, even though they are indistinguishable to the ear". On the other hand, if someone says on the basis of sound spectrograms "This recording was made by the defendent...http://www.englishforums.com/English/NobodyMentionedFonzie/jlpcg/post.htm#812118Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:28:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:812118robert bannisterI would need more information about the speech of the person in question to be able to say whether "whut" was being used here as eye dialect or simply as phonetic spelling. Very good point. Obviously, as a BrE/AusE speaker, my pronunciation is 'wot'. The 'whut' spelling presumably indicates the vowel sound, but it is not clear whether it also indicates an 'hw' initial consonant - I have seen 'phwut' used to represent this. Rob Bannisterhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/GeminateUnassimilatedNasalConsonants-English/5/jhmbw/Post.htm#790920Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:39:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:790920r fWhat *has* happened is that, as is common, speech groups further from the "linguistic center" of the language have tended ... be largely in the US, notably in California, and that's where the most rapid change is likely to take place. Seems to me that there are two kinds of changes going on, which I, being a non-linguist (NTTAWWT), will call phonological and something-else-ological, where the latter has to do not with phonetic-type stuff but with things like grammar and vocabulary and stuff. But when you look at where the radical phonetic stuff is happening, it isn't necessarily in places like California, or in the major population centers. What could be more radical change than the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, taking...http://www.englishforums.com/English/CapOrCup/jcwhb/post.htm#764201Thu, 04 Dec 2003 17:27:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:764201jonathan jordanIt seems that every time I post a comment it provokes a load ofdiscussion threads. But not to be detered, ... changes. Forinstance, they say " 'ospikal" when they mean "hospital", or "ee 'ant gotnone" instead of "he doesn't have any". True. (I'm from Sheffield, though I don't have a very strong dialect myself.) I have even heard an educated(?) businessman say "Ey loowk! Ee got like wot I got!". I guess you mean "look" with the vowel of "boot" rather than that of "put". I think this is a low-prestige variant in Sheffield, though I have reason to believe that it's more standard in some other parts of northern England. But in spite of all...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronouncingDonQuixote/5/wxhzd/Post.htm#739149Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:26:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:739149jonathan jordanAccording to Google the British pronunciation is "quick-sote"whereas the US ... or"donkey-shot". How do you experts here handle this one ? I'd say no middle ground either "QUICK-sote" or the original(well, roughly): "ki-HOT-eh". Isn't it spelt with a in modern Spanish? I'm sure I've seen something like . In English I'd feel a bit stupid attempting to pronounce foreignnames "authentically" most Brits say "Madame Bovary" to rhyme ... rhyme with "rowdy" (instead of "gow-DEE"), and, getting back on track, " suh-VAN-tees" (instead of"thair-VAN-tess"), so why not "don QUICK-sote"? It depends a lot on the foreign...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AhArAwOrAwAhAr/7/whnzz/Post.htm#712211Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:11:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:712211woody wordpeckerIt's an elliptical definition. I read Ross's line as meaning "(the vowel contained in) cot, bother...". That's still meaningless. There is no vowel that is contained in every rendition of "cot". The vowels that may be contained in "cot" don't even belong, in general, to the same phoneme. They aren't in the same phoneme unless someone would perceive them as being the same sound. Until you make the statement more specific, "the vowel contained in 'cot'" can mean the vowel in "cot" in any variety of English spoken in the world. If you make it very specific, like "the vowel in 'cot' in the speech of Ross Howard", it still doesn't tell us...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AhArAwOrAwAhAr/6/whnzz/Post.htm#712056Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:31:27 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:712056woody wordpecker( . . . ) The RP1 reading "Arthur" starts out with stating his name. It sounds like he may be saying "Dudley Knight". See? The sound quality is so poor you couldn't even hear him saying "translated by Dudley Knight". I only caught it when I used headphones that were far more expensive than any visitor to the site should be expected to own. I knew he said "translated", but I chose to pretend he didn't, because I knew he didn't translate the piece. I chose to take his meaning to be "read by Dudley Knight". Not really. We'll never be on the same page until you recognize that the IPA symbol "turned-script-a" is defined to be a rounded vowel and British dictionaries...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AhArAwOrAwAhAr/10/whnzz/Post.htm#712026Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:08:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:712026woody wordpeckerTo what extent is this influenced by the initial consonants ... for these vowels, both issuing from the same lip shape. Having looked in a mirror, I agree with Matti: whatever internal movement of the tongue produces the two distinct RP ... of artificial actorish demonstration of the words, there is a rounding for "cot" and "caught" not visible in normal speech. All you're saying is that you don't use (A.) in the pronunciation of any of the words you've mentioned. You use some other vowel(s). So your pronunciation doesn't agree with that shown in Oxford University Press dictionaries and in the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary ( http://tinyurl.com/r7hm ). I have no complaint about people...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AhArAwOrAwAhAr/10/whnzz/Post.htm#711339Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:04:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:711339woody wordpeckerIn Received Pronunciation, "bother" is (bA.D@), "father" is (fA:D@). That ... "bother" is rounded, while the one in "father" is not. And the one in "bother" is noticeably shorter. Depends upon what you mean by "noticeably". I've plotted the time functions for Markus's "bother" and "father". The first syllable of "father" is a little longer, but not enough to write home about, in my opinion. You can see the time functions and hear the related files in the directory http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue related/speech examples/ The time functions are in the file markus bother father time functions.gif, at http://tinyurl.com/r4we The sound files...