Transcription of my speech

Hi,

I'd like to get a narrow IPA transcription of my speech, sort of like what Travis and Lazar do. I'd also like to know if I have any vowel shifts or mergers or vocalization, or other unusual phenomena. So, what do you think of my accent?

http://www.zippyshare.com/v/81353591/file.html

I was going to transcribe it, but I could not get the Flash app to work right on this machine for some reason.

You don't have to use Flash. You can use the direct download link:

It's at the top right above the advertisements:
"Uploaded: 01-01-2009 17:46
Last download: 01-01-2009 17:46
Download Link: Download"

I am looking forward to more things like this. It would be interesting to know HOW you can actually recognize all the features of a language so that you can transcribe it. I guess it's only possible in slow speech. But how do you actually identify a vowel, consonant, of feature without being too biased? One example might be deciding whether someone actually said "rainbow" or "raimbow" (yes, sorry, I am still obsessed with assimilation). It took me a lot of time, by listening closely to some parts repeatedly, for dozens of times, before I was convinced there's no assimilation in any of those "rainbows" in the passage. All /n/ + /b/, to me.
But how can a person easily recognize all the features? It's not easy to avoid bias... you hear what you want to hear, you know what I mean?

Transcribing other people's speech is far, far harder than transcribing one's own, as when transcribing one's own one has access to how one actually enunciated everything oneself - something that one does not have access to from listening to someone else's speech.

It is possible to objectively analyse speech with a program like "Praat". You can measure the formants of the vowels to find exactly how front or back a vowel is or how close or open it is. Then you can compare the numbers to other speakers.

Here's my initial attempt at a transcription:

[wɪn ðə ˈsʌnˌɫɐɪt ˌstɹɐɪks ˈɹe:nˌdɹɒ:ps ɪn ði ˈɛɹ ðe: ˈækt əz ə ˈpʰɹɪ.zm ən ˈfɔ:ɹm ə ˈɹe:nˌbo: ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: ɪz ðə dəˈvɪ.ʒn əv ˈwɐɪʔ ˈɫɐɪt ɪn.tə ˈmɛ.ni ˈbju:.ɾə.fɫ ˈkʰʌ.ɫɚz ˈði:z ˈtʰe:k ðə ˈʃe:p əv ə ˈɫɔ:ŋ ˈɹaond ˈʌɹtʃ wɪθ ɪts ˈpʰæθ ˈhaɪ əˈbʌv ən ɪts ˈtʰu: ˌɛndʒ əˈpʰɛɹ.ənt.ɫi biˈɒ:nd ðə həˈɹae.zn ðɛɹ ɪz əˈkʰɔ:ɹ.iŋ tə ˈɫɛ.dʒnd ə ˈbɔɪ.ɫiŋ ˈpʰɔ:ɾ əv ˈgo:ɫd əʔ ˌwʌn ˈɛnd ˈpʰi:.pɫˈɫʊk bət ˈno: ˌwʌn ˌɛ.vɚ ˈfɑendz ɪt wɪn ə ˈman ˈɫʊks fɚ ˈsʌm.θiŋ biˈɒ:nd ɪz ˈɹi:tʃ hɪz ˈfɹɛndz ˈse: i ɪz ˈɫʊ.kiŋ fɚ ðə ˈpɒ:ɾ əv ˈgo:ɫd ət ði ˈɛnd əv ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: θɹuˈaot ðə ˈsɛn.tʃɚ.iz ˈpʰi:.pɫ əv ɪkˈspɫe:nd ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: ɪn ˈvɛɹ.i.əs ˈwe:z ˈsʌm həv ɪkˈsɛp.tɪ ɪʔ əz ə ˈmɪɹ.ə.kɫ wɪˈθaot ˈfɪ.zɪ.kɫ ˌɛk.spɫəˈne:.ʃn tʰə ðə ˈhi:.bɹu:z ɪt wəz ə ˈtʰo:.kn ðə ˌðɛɹ wə bi ˈno: ˌmɔ:ɹ ˈju:.nəˌvɜ˞.sɫ̩ ˈfɫʌdz ðə ˈgɹi:ks ˌju:s.tu ɪˈmæ.dʒn ɪʔ wəz ə ˈsaen fɹəm ðə ˈgɒ:dz tə fɔ:ɹˈtʰɛɫ ˈwɔ:ɹ ʔɚ ˈhɛ.vi ˈɹe:n ðə ˈnɔ:ɹs.mən kənˈsɪ.ɚd ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: əz ə ˈbɹɪdʒ ˌo:.vɚ ˈwɪtʃ ðə ˈgɒ:dz ˈpʰæst fɹəm ˈɜ˞θ tə ðɛɹ ˈho:m ɪn ðə ˈskɑe ˈʌ.ðɚz əv ˈtʰɹaed tu ɪkˈspɫe:n ðə fəˈnɒ:.məˌnɒ:n ˈfɪ.zɪk.li ˈɛɹ.əˌstɒ:.ɾɫ ˈθɒ:t ðə ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: wəz ˈkʰɒ:zd bae ɹəˈfɫɛk.ʃn əv ðə ˌsʌnz ˈɹe:z bae ðə ˈɹe:n ˈsɪns ˈðɛn ˈfɪ.zə.sɪsts həv ˈfaond ðə ɪ ɪz ˈnɒ:ʔ ɹəˌfɫɛk.ʃn bə ɹəˈfɹæk.ʃn bae ðə ˈɹe:nˌdɹɒ:ps wɪtʃ ˈkʰɒ:.zɪz ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo:z ˈmɛ.ni ˈkʰɒ:m.pɫəˌke:.ɪ aeˈdi:.əz əˈbaoʔ ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: həv bɪn ˈfɔ:ɹmd ðə ˈdɪ.fɹəns ɪn ðə ˈɹe:nˌbo: dəˈpʰɛndz kənˈsɪ.ɾɚ.ə.bɫi əˈpʰɒ:n ðə ˈsaez əv ðə ˈdɹɒ:ps æn ðə ˈwɪtθ ʌv ðə ˈkʰʌ.ɫɚd ˈbɛənd ɪŋˈkʰɹi:.sɪz əz ðə ˈsaez əv ðə ˈdɹɒ:ps ˈɪŋˌkʰɹi:.sɪz ði ˈæk.ʃu.ɫ ˈpʰɹaeˌmɛɹ.i ˈɹe:nˌbo: əbˈzɜ˞:vd ɪz ˈsɛd tə ˌbi: ði ɪˈfɛkt əv ˈsu:.pɚˌɪm.pəˈzɪ.ʃn əv ə ˈnʌmbɚ əv ˈbo:z ɪf ðə ˈɹɛɾ əv ðə ˈsɛ.knd ˌbo: ˈfɒ:ɫz əˌpʰɒ:n ðə ˈgɹi:n əv ðə ˈfɜ˞st ðə ɹiˈzʌɫts ɪz tə ˈgɪv ə ˈbo: wɪθ ən æbˈnɔ:ɹ.mɫ.i ˈwaed ˈjɛ.ɫo: ˈband sɪns ˈɹɛd ən ˈgɹi:n ˌlɐɪt wɛn ˈmɪkst ˌfɔ:ɹm ˈjɛ.lo: ˈðɪs ɪz ə ˈvɛɹ.i ˈkʰɒ:.mən ˌtʰɐɪp əv ˈbo: ˈwʌn ˈʃo:.iŋ ˈme:n.li ˈɹɛd n ˈjɛ.ɫo: wɪθ ˈɫɪ.ɾɫ ɚ ˈno: ˌgɹi:n ɚ ˈbɫu:]

As Travis notes, I think it is more difficult to transcribe other people's speech. So... you appear to be low-back (cot-caught) merged, using a rounded vowel [ɒ:], possibly with some tensing before [ŋ]; you seem to use mainly monophthongal /e:/ and /o:/; you seem to have Canadian Raising, at least for /ae/; your /ae/ vowel seemed a bit backed at times; before nasals, your /æ/ vowel seemed variably lowered or raised, so I wasn't sure about that one; and you seem to have some elision of intervocalic /t/ and /d/, like in "according", "accepted it", and "considered".

It's General American.

No. It's not drastically dissimilar from GA, but there are some significant differences.

Travis,

Could you please tell us the name of your dialect/form of English? I talked to some people from Wisconsin and none of them had heard of a dialect like the one you speak.

Is there a name for it?

>> No. It's not drastically dissimilar from GA, but there are some significant differences. <<

How so? I thought General American was neutral unaccented English with the cot-caught merger.

This is not the thread for this, but, as long as you are asking, it has no name, aside from a generic one like, say, "Milwaukee English". And mind you that the forms that I generally write down represent the very most extreme forms found here outside of AAVE, as such is what I normally speak. Likewise, if the people you know from Wisconsin are from outside southeastern Wisconsin, there is no assurance that they even know anyone who speaks like what I have transcribed, as there is non-negligible linguistic variation within Wisconsin.

Another major consideration is that most people have very little linguistic awareness, and for that matter, are commonly blind to how they themselves speak, so simply *asking* someone who is not linguistically aware about how they themselves speak is of little use. And even when asking people things to figure out how they say them, one has to "trick" people into speaking in a fashion that is natural and not careful or rehearsed, or else they will speak overly carefully and undermine the accuracy of the results one gets.

I should have mentioned that even here in Milwaukee, there is considerable variation in speech from individual to individual amongst even non-AAVE-speaking younger people. For instance, while my own speech falls close to the high end of consonant assimilation, elision, and overall uncarefulness found here, I am often rather conservative vowel-wise and with respect to quantity, while there are often other people of the same social and age group here which have less assimilation or elision-happy but less conservative vowel-wise or quantity-wise. And there other kinds of overall variation; for instance, on one hand, my fiancée is not that careful speech-wise but does not strongly express /t d n/-elision, while on the other hand this one good friend of mine is normally has quite careful enunciation, and yet very strongly expresses /t d n/-elision.

<<How so? I thought General American was neutral unaccented English with the cot-caught merger.>>

First of all, there's no such thing as "unaccented" English: GA and RP are, themselves, accents. Second, GA is not necessarily cot-caught merged; traditionally, GA was cot-caught *unmerged*, but the merger has become so prevalent that it could now be considered an optional variant in GA.

Anyway, some features that distinguish her speech from GA are the use of a distinctly rounded "cot-caught" vowel, and her variable elision of intervocalic /t/ and /d/.

>> Anyway, some features that distinguish her speech from GA are the use of a distinctly rounded "cot-caught" vowel <<

So it must be a Boston accent then because of the rounded cot-caught vowel.