For some reason "father" apparantly failed to shift from /a:/ to /e:/ along with the other words during the Great Vowel Shift. Does anyone have any idea why it did?
Why didn't "father" undergo the GRS?
You raise an interesting point. If you take a hypothetical dialect that 1) is rhotic, 2) has no trap-bath split, and 3) has no father-bother merger, then you're left with "father" as pretty much the only word that uses plain [A] (excepting some borrowings like "pasta").
<<Does anyone have any idea why it did?>>
Sorry, I have absolutely no idea. But it would be cool if someone here did. ;-)
<<Does anyone have any idea why it did?>>
Sorry, I have absolutely no idea. But it would be cool if someone here did. ;-)
<<Sorry, I have absolutely no idea. But it would be cool if someone here did. ;-)>>
I just found out something about it in another forum:
<<According to the OED forms which did undergo the GVS, with spellings like "faither", are found in dialects (it doesn't say which ones), as are forms with a short vowel, rhyming with "gather".
It calls the development of the vowel "anomalous", but does mention "rather" as a similar case.>>
I just found out something about it in another forum:
<<According to the OED forms which did undergo the GVS, with spellings like "faither", are found in dialects (it doesn't say which ones), as are forms with a short vowel, rhyming with "gather".
It calls the development of the vowel "anomalous", but does mention "rather" as a similar case.>>