re: Ah = Ar, Aw = Or, Aw =/= Ah / Ar page 9

In 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 for the individual words are
markus bother.wav, http://tinyurl.com/r4wp , and
markus father.wav, http://tinyurl.com/r4wu .
For convenient reference, I've also put in that directory Markus's full rendition of the "bother father caught ... " piece. It's markus bother father caught.wav,
http://tinyurl.com/r4x1 .

I have something close to (A.) in "bother" as well (and other words of the "cot" and "caught" classes), but ... and noticeably less tightly rounded as well - although still rounded enough to be more (A.) than (A), I think.

I like to remind myself that the phonetics books tell us the rounding of the vowels on the "back" side of the
quadrilateral decreases from top to bottom. This should mean that (A.) is less rounded that (O), and much less rounded than (u).

Also, with all due respect to Markus, if he's the Totally Official AUE yardstick for RP, which in turn is ... quality of the recording, but if that accent were any plummier it'd be hanging from a tree in an orchard.)

Oy, then I wonder what Katy Edgcombe sounds like, since didn't Markus say that she had a "cut glass RP" accent?
I suspect that when Markus turns into "Freddy" he starts speaking down-home Estuary English.
I've never heard a1a speak either, but I've seen enough 1930s-era British films to have a decent idea of what his accent is probably like. Raised /&/s of course.

I'm from Brooklyn.

Well, why didn't you say so, my brother? What neighborhood?

Sheepshead Bay.

MINMINM = three-way distinct merry/marry/Mary. Most Americans have at most a two-way distinction. On th'East Coast, in the major urban centers, MINMINMism still survives, but it's under attack.

I am not minminm; I distinguish 'merry' from the others.

From University City, Mo.,
Michael Hamm Since mid-September of 2003, BA scl Math, PBK, NYU I've been erasing too much UBE. (Email Removed) Of a reply, then, if you have been cheated, http://math.wustl.edu/~msh210/ Likely your mail's by mistake been deleted.

( . . . )

No. Apart from the lip-rounding which, as you say, isn't essential to obtaining a typical RP (A.)

What possible basis can you have for calling the sound (A.) if it doesn't have lip rounding?
What is your definition of IPA "turned script a", the equivalent of ASCII IPA (A.)?
Why are you comfortable with not having the same definition the International Phonetics Association has for it?

I have no great problem accepting that British dictionaries are wrong, and that RP speakers don't use (A.) in "bother". I do have a problem with calling whatever vowel they do use (A.) if it doesn't have lip rounding.

there's some kind of throat constriction

Nasalization? Pharyngealization?

Also, with all due respect to Markus, if he's the ... plummier it'd be hanging from a tree in an orchard.)

Are we listening to the same sound file? This one, marked RP speaker? http://www.alt-usage-english.org/audio archive.shtml If so, then we sure aren't using the same definition of "plummy."

I was using the first RP speaker on the page: "RP speaker 1" reading "Arthur the Rat". You mean that's not Markus? Whoever it is, it's plummier than plummy that make up his "mairnd", "quite dead" as "kwait daird" and "neaouw look hyair" is, well . . . plummy.

If however, that's not Markus, and Markus is the "RP speaker 1" who reads "I teach Ferdinand", then I fully retract my plummy claim (and apologise, if Markus happens to be reading this) that's not plummy; it's Educated Estuary AKA New Labour.
For me, the most representative sample of contemporary RP is the "RP speaker 1" who reads the Rainbow texts, who seems to be the same person as "RP speaker 2" reading "Arthur the Rat".

(Note to Webmaster: Might it not be an idea to assign a number to each voice and stick with it or even reveal who's reading what by naming them really confusing).

I met Markus some years back, a delightful person, but I couldn't help thinking that RP didn't mean what it used to.

Yes, I had a brief exchange of e-mails with him years back (which I think you and Brian were in on too) and drew the same conclusion about the delightfulness, not the perpetuity of the definition of RP, obviously.

I'll see if I can find a sound file of what I'd call plummy... Okay, the first speaker here is reasonably so (not ridiculously or exaggeratedly so I've heard worse): http://www.ukans.edu/~idea/index2.html

Give me more clues, if you can. When I click on the Rainbow passage I just get the text, no sound files.
**
Ross Howard

( . . . )

I'll see if I can find a sound file of what I'd call plummy... Okay, the first speaker here is reasonably so (not ridiculously or exaggeratedly so I've heard worse): http://www.ukans.edu/~idea/index2.html

Please be more specific. That URL just takes me to the home page of IDEA.
If by "first speaker here" you mean the first speaker on the page headed "Dialects of England", it seems clear the voice there doesn't fit the definition of "plummy" in The New Shorter Oxford :
b (Of the voice) rich and thick-sounding, esp. as
supposedly characteristic of the British upper
classes; mellow and deep but somewhat drawling;
The voice of that speaker is not deep or thick-sounding, and the speech is not at all drawling. I'm not sure what they mean by "mellow", but I wouldn't call it that. It's a pleasant, unaffected accent to listen to.
I also question Ross Howard's description of Markus Laker's speech as plummy: It's not drawling, it's not deep, it's not thick-sounding, and I wouldn't call it mellow.

No. Apart from the lip-rounding which, as you say, isn't essential to obtaining a typical RP (A.)

What possible basis can you have for calling the sound (A.) if it doesn't have lip rounding?

COD9, the works of Michael Swan.. need I go on

What is your definition of IPA "turned script a", the equivalent of ASCII IPA (A.)?

Cot, bother,Ross (my vested interest in it), Bob (yours), etc.

Why are you comfortable with not having the same definition the International Phonetics Association has for it? I have no ... "bother". I do have a problem with calling whatever vowel they do use (A.) if it doesn't have lip rounding.

Oh, it usually does, but as Matti said, it's not the key to producing it.

there's some kind of throat constriction

Nasalization? Pharyngealization?

I don't know the technical term, but think the reflex proto-retching that happens when the dentist accidentally (?) knocks his mirror against your soft palate.
**
Ross Howard

I also question Ross Howard's description of Markus Laker's speech as plummy: It's not drawling, it's not deep, it's not thick-sounding, and I wouldn't call it mellow.

Who is Markus? RP speaker what number reading what text? This is seeaaouuw confusing!
**
Ross Howard

I'll see if I can find a sound file of ... (not ridiculously or exaggeratedly so I've heard worse): http://www.ukans.edu/~idea/index2.html

Please be more specific. That URL just takes me to the home page of IDEA. If by "first speaker here" ... sure what they mean by "mellow", but I wouldn't call it that. It's a pleasant, unaffected accent to listen to.

Yes. That's pretty standard contemporary (i.e. plumfree) RP for me. Similar to the AUE site's RP2 reading "Arthur", who is also RP1 reading Rainbow, I think. Is that Markus? If so, who's the RP1 reading "Arthur", because he's the only one I'm claiming is plummy.

**
Ross Howard