Are these really the official General American pronunciations?
http://www5.zippyshare.com/v/30748296/file.html
http://www5.zippyshare.com/v/30748296/file.html
General American English
There are no ''official'' pronunciations, American English is no French.
>> The file didn't work for me. <<
Really? It works for me. Do you have a .WAV player?
Really? It works for me. Do you have a .WAV player?
There is no official General American, yes, and it can vary greatly with some definitions of "General American". (I myself though tend to prefer more narrow definitions thereof as they are more useful for the purposes of actually defining a reference point for North American English varieties.)
But that said, though, I think the vowel positions were a bit off in the sample. While that in "cot" was correct for GA proper, the vowel in "on" was too far back for GA proper, as the vowel typically transcribed /ɑ(ː)/, found in "on" in GA, is actually realized far more centrally than the realized vowel used for such in "on", which rather was very close to cardinal [ɑ], in the sample.
But that said, though, I think the vowel positions were a bit off in the sample. While that in "cot" was correct for GA proper, the vowel in "on" was too far back for GA proper, as the vowel typically transcribed /ɑ(ː)/, found in "on" in GA, is actually realized far more centrally than the realized vowel used for such in "on", which rather was very close to cardinal [ɑ], in the sample.
That said, the sample seemed to have the prosody and pitch contours of GA, which always sticks out to me due to how it contrasts with such in even higher registers of the dialect here (to the point that I generally can tell GA-like varieties from such on prosody and pitch contours alone).
Make that "prosody, vowel length, and pitch contours" above (in both places).
<<Really? It works for me. Do you have a .WAV player?>>
Oh, okay, it wouldn't play in iTunes, but it plays on Audacity.
Generally I think the pronunciations in the audio seem to be within the GA range. Travis, do you think that the speaker might actually be using /Q:/, rather than /A:/, for "on"?
Oh, okay, it wouldn't play in iTunes, but it plays on Audacity.
Generally I think the pronunciations in the audio seem to be within the GA range. Travis, do you think that the speaker might actually be using /Q:/, rather than /A:/, for "on"?
>>Generally I think the pronunciations in the audio seem to be within the GA range. Travis, do you think that the speaker might actually be using /Q:/, rather than /A:/, for "on"?<<
The thing, though, is that the vowel still contrasts with the /Q:/ used in "caught" - it is effectively at the exact same point of articulation, it seems, but it is not rounded. Mind you though that cardinal [A] and [Q] actually only weakly differ with respect to rounding, due to the normal shape of the mouth associated with their point of articulation. There is only a weak difference between the unrounded cardinal [A] and the rounded cardinal [Q] in practice. However, though, this difference is reduced even more by the vowel in "on" seemingly being raised and backed further a bit, making it closer to the vowel in "cought" (which is generally not quite cardinal in NAE to begin with).
The thing, though, is that the vowel still contrasts with the /Q:/ used in "caught" - it is effectively at the exact same point of articulation, it seems, but it is not rounded. Mind you though that cardinal [A] and [Q] actually only weakly differ with respect to rounding, due to the normal shape of the mouth associated with their point of articulation. There is only a weak difference between the unrounded cardinal [A] and the rounded cardinal [Q] in practice. However, though, this difference is reduced even more by the vowel in "on" seemingly being raised and backed further a bit, making it closer to the vowel in "cought" (which is generally not quite cardinal in NAE to begin with).
What sticks out to me about "on", though, is that it is specifically non-GA-like, in contrast to the rest of the speech sample, which is very GA-like. If anything, my random guess at why "on" is as it is in the sample is substratum influence from some Southern dialect; the reason for such a guess is that such is a very, very typical feature of such dialects in particular within NAE, and it is not infrequent for people to speak GA but who have influence from Southern dialects at one level or another.
The vowel in ON in this recording is something between [A] and [Q].
The COT/DON/ON vowel in General American is not central [ä], but low back [A].
in NCVS accents COT/DON/ON are in the vowel space between [ä] and [{], depending on the shift of a speaker.
Labov mentions Tucson Arizona and St. John's NewFoundland as an example of ''low central merger'' cot/caught [kät] (rather than [kQt] or [kAt].)
In California all three [än], [An], [Qn] would be fine, while [an] and [{n] would sound off.
The COT/DON/ON vowel in General American is not central [ä], but low back [A].
in NCVS accents COT/DON/ON are in the vowel space between [ä] and [{], depending on the shift of a speaker.
Labov mentions Tucson Arizona and St. John's NewFoundland as an example of ''low central merger'' cot/caught [kät] (rather than [kQt] or [kAt].)
In California all three [än], [An], [Qn] would be fine, while [an] and [{n] would sound off.
>>The COT/DON/ON vowel in General American is not central [ä], but low back [A].<<
It is not really truly cardinal [ɑ(ː)] though, unlike its counterpart in English English (which I myself at least perceive as being awfully close to my own /ɒ/, unlike its GA counterpart). Rather, it tends to be more like [ɑ̟(ː)], where it is completely central, but it is not completely back either.
It is not really truly cardinal [ɑ(ː)] though, unlike its counterpart in English English (which I myself at least perceive as being awfully close to my own /ɒ/, unlike its GA counterpart). Rather, it tends to be more like [ɑ̟(ː)], where it is completely central, but it is not completely back either.
We need to go to Omaha and get the latest vowel realizations data to make the chart LOL At least they voted for Obama :yay:
I myself at least still favor the area around east-central Iowa or so as the model for General American, as more western dialects are generally cot-caught merged while GA proper is not.