Weak forms in British English
Are there weak forms for these words in British English? In which dialect(s)? (Non rhotic)
Or
Her
Your, You're
There, Their, They're
When
Where
The Longman Dictionary of contemporary English give the weak forms of some of them, so it looks like OR, HER, A, OF, ARE are all pronounced the same when weak, as "uh", and YOU, YOUR, YOU'RE are all "yuh". Weird, isn't it?
<<The Longman Dictionary of contemporary English give...>>
Gives, damn it.
If I may, what is a 'weak form'?
<<Or
Your, You're>>
Yeah, reduced forms for these - [@], [j@] - definitely exist in British English, and they're listed in dictionaries. I think I read somewhere that many RP speakers lack reduced forms for "your" and "you're", tending to use [jO:] where Americans would use [j@`] for "your" and "you're" - and I think this is borne out by some RP speakers that I've heard -, but the reduced forms are definitely used and attested.
<<There, Their, They're>>
Are there reduced forms for these at all? As far as I know, British people would just say [DE@] in all contexts. I'm from Massachusetts and I pronounce these all as [DE@`], with no reduced form.
<<When>>
Pronouncing it like [w@n] (or [wIn]) in rapid speech? I don't know; it probably occurs.
<<Where>>
Again, I'm not really aware of a reduced form for this. I think they would just say [wE@].
By the way, I keep failing to send my message because I instinctively type "I hate spam" at the end of every post, and now they've changed the question. :)
Oh, and what I said about "your" and "you're" would apply for unstressed "you" too - although [j@] for "you" definitely exists in BrEng, I think many RP speakers might avoid it and use [ju] where Americans would use [j@]. I think [j@] (for "you", "your", "you're") is a feature that wasn't part of traditional RP but may be working its way up from vernacular speech.
And I think the reduced form [@], for "of", is another feature that probably would have been considered unacceptable for traditional RP. Even for me as an AmEng speaker, outside of the sequence "of the" (often [@ D@] in rapid speech), it sounds a bit off (or reverse-affected) for me to pronounce "of" as [@].
Of course a British person could give you a better answer.
Actually, no, I was probably a bit harsh on [@]; I suppose I do use it a bit in vernacular speech. But I perceive it as very informal.
With respect to pronouns, I'm not sure if seeing them as "reduced" forms is right. Whereas the ones here may be similar to the stressed forms, there are others that are radically different in their streesed and unstressed versions. That said:
Speaking for my own, North Eastern, dialect:
<<OR, HER, A, OF, ARE >>
[Q] [6] [@] [@] [6]
roughly speaking. The "of" does come across as particularly informal if before a vowel, though I have heard it.
<<Your, You're >>
both as [j6] and so distinct from "you", [j@]
<<There, Their, They're >>
The first has no weak form, the others would be [D6]
<<When, Where >>
No weak form.
Very interesting. I see there must be lots of variations, as expected.