Jump to content

General Chat


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

You've got me searching youtube watching kids learn to count videos trying to hear this elusive one that rhymes with gun. I hate you.

Can't you just imagine it? 'Score was 1-0'. Phonetically said: 'Score was wun nil'. Welsh people say it as well as Fat Moyles

I've tried, but I can't imagine it without it sounding completely retarded so I refuse to believe that anyone says it like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got me searching youtube watching kids learn to count videos trying to hear this elusive one that rhymes with gun. I hate you.

Can't you just imagine it? 'Score was 1-0'. Phonetically said: 'Score was wun nil'. Welsh people say it as well as Fat Moyles

I've tried, but I can't imagine it without it sounding completely retarded so I refuse to believe that anyone says it like that.

Most (all?) American accents also feature that pronunciation...

Related: Cot & caught

The cot-caught merger (also known as the low back merger) is a phonemic merger, a sound change, that occurs in some varieties of English. The merger occurs in some accents of Scottish English, and to some extent in Mid Ulster English, but is best known as a phenomenon of many varieties of North American English.

The sound change causes the vowel in caught, talk, and small to be pronounced like the vowel in cot, rock, and doll, so that cot and caught, for example, become homophones, and the two vowels merge into a single phoneme. The change does not affect a vowel followed by /r/, so barn and born remain distinct, and starring and warring do not rhyme.

The presence of the merger and its absence are both found in many different regions of the continent, and in both urban and rural environments.

The symbols traditionally used to transcribe the vowels in the words cot and caught as spoken in American English are /ɑ/ and /ɔ/, respectively, although their precise phonetic values may vary, as does the phonetic value of the merged vowel in the regions where the merger occurs.

According to Labov, Ash, and Boberg, the merger does not generally occur in the southern United States (with exceptions), along most of the American side of the Great Lakes region, or in the "Northeast Corridor" extended metropolitan region from Providence, Rhode Island to Baltimore. It is very widespread across Canada, the Boston, Massachusetts area (see Boston accent) and northeastern New England, the Pittsburgh area (see Pittsburghese), and is also heard throughout the western U.S. The latter seems to be the source of its introduction into the Midwest as it appears to be spreading eastward. A recent survey directed by William Labov of the University of Pennsylvania has shown that the merger can be found today among younger generations (roughly people under 40) in Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas. It is also heard across much of Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri. Similarly, the merger affects central portions of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, though its appearance in these areas may represent a westward expansion of the change from Pennsylvania. The distribution of the merger is complex, even without taking into account the mobility of the American population; there are pockets of speakers with the merger in areas that lack it, and vice versa. There are areas where the merger has only partially occurred, or is in a state of transition. Labov et al.'s research is based on telephone surveys with subjects who grew up in the city where they lived at the time of the interview. The 2003 Harvard Dialect Survey, in which subjects did not necessarily grow up in the place they identified as the source of their dialect features, indicates that there are speakers of both merging and contrast-preserving accents throughout the country, though the basic isoglosses are almost identical to those revealed by Labov's 1996 telephone survey. Both surveys indicate that approximately 60% of American English speakers preserve the contrast, while approximately 40% make the merger.

For merged speakers in Canada and most of the United States, the two sounds [ɑ] and [ɔ] are allophones; they often do not perceive differences in their usage, hear neither of them as a separate phoneme, and hear the distinct vowels used by speakers whose dialects do distinguish them as variations on the same vowel. They hear the broad A of British Received Pronunciation as the same, single vowel sound. But in Received Pronunciation, there are three sounds distinguished: the long /ɑː/ of cart, the long /ɔː/ of caught, and the short rounded /ɒ/ of cot.

Speakers with the merger in northeastern New England still maintain a phonemic distinction between a fronted and unrounded /aː/ and a back and usually rounded /ɒː/, because in northeastern New England (unlike in Canada and the Western United States), the cot-caught merger occurred without the father-bother merger. Thus, although northeastern New Englanders pronounce both cot and caught as [kɒːt], they pronounce cart as [kaːt].

Labov et al. also reveal that about 15% of respondents have the merger before /n/ but not before /t/, so that Don and Dawn are homophonous, but cot and caught are not. A much smaller group (about 4%) has the reverse situation: cot and caught are homophonous but Don and Dawn are distinct.

Possible homophones for speakers with the merger include: bobble-bauble, body-bawdy, bot-bought, collar-caller, cock-caulk, chock-chalk, don-dawn, knotty-naughty, mod-Maud, nod-gnawed, not/knot-naught, odd-awed, Oz-awes, pol-Paul/pall, popper-pauper, rot-wrought, sod-sawed, stock-stalk, tock-talk, tot-taut/taught and wok-walk.

Speakers who have the "father-bother" merger in addition to the "cot-caught" merger may have further homophones such as ah-awe, Pa-paw, Pa's-pause/paws and shah-Shaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have women (or a woman) on your mind, so you are excused.

Bacchus is OK. What about hotel bars? Often quite nice. Burlington ain't all that though. Does Malmaison have a bar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â