I peonounce stressed "or" actually like the word "are". Does anyone else do this?
stressed "or"
no. it's just you. You are the ONLY person in the world who talks like that.
I myself distinctly pronounce stressed "or" and "are", as [O:R] and [a:R], but I do very frequently merge unstressed "or" and "are" as [R=].
<<no. it's just you. You are the ONLY person in the world who talks like that.>>
I'm certainly not. I'm 64 and have heard many people say it this way. I asking if there was anyone here in this forum who says it that way.
I'm certainly not. I'm 64 and have heard many people say it this way. I asking if there was anyone here in this forum who says it that way.
(One note: I will also pronounce stressed "are" as [A:R], strangely more in informal speech than in formal speech.)
These symbols are a transcription system for precisely marking down pronunciation (unlike trying to spell such out "phonetically", which is very inaccurate) named X-SAMPA. For more information on X-SAMPA, go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-SAMPA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-SAMPA
<<These symbols are a transcription system for precisely marking down pronunciation (unlike trying to spell such out "phonetically", which is very inaccurate) named X-SAMPA. For more information on X-SAMPA, go to:>>
I'd probably more accurately mark down my pronunciation by spelling such out phonetically rather than using X-sampa due to the fact that I have no idea what the symbols mean.
I'd probably more accurately mark down my pronunciation by spelling such out phonetically rather than using X-sampa due to the fact that I have no idea what the symbols mean.
I assume Lazar must not pronounce word-final "r" due to the fact that there is no [R] in his transcription of "or" while Travis has an [R] there.
If I've gotten the symbols correct, I pronounce both "or" and "are" as [A:R]. I'm not sure if I have the symbols right though.
>>I assume Lazar must not pronounce word-final "r" due to the fact that there is no [R] in his transcription of "or" while Travis has an [R] there.<<
Actually, [@`] is the unstressed version of the General American "er" sound, corresponding to its stressed counterpart [3`]. The sound I write down as [R] or as [R=] for its syllabic counterpart (analogous to GA [3`] or [@`]) is distinct from such and does not exist in General American, which would have a sound more like [r\] in the place of said [R].
Actually, [@`] is the unstressed version of the General American "er" sound, corresponding to its stressed counterpart [3`]. The sound I write down as [R] or as [R=] for its syllabic counterpart (analogous to GA [3`] or [@`]) is distinct from such and does not exist in General American, which would have a sound more like [r\] in the place of said [R].
<<I assume Lazar must not pronounce word-final "r" due to the fact that there is no [R] in his transcription of "or" while Travis has an [R] there.>>
No, I do pronounce the "r" there. But I transcribe my pronunciation of "or" as a rhoticized diphthong, [O@`]. The [`] indicates the r-sound.
No, I do pronounce the "r" there. But I transcribe my pronunciation of "or" as a rhoticized diphthong, [O@`]. The [`] indicates the r-sound.
>>If I've gotten the symbols correct, I pronounce both "or" and "are" as [A:R]. I'm not sure if I have the symbols right though.<<
Actually, you almost certainly do not have [R] there, as such is rather rare in English dialects, and I have not heard such in use outside Wisconsin myself. Considering that I have not heard of merger of stressed "or" and "are" here in Wisconsin, or anywhere in the Upper Midwest for that matter, I doubt you have [R] here. Consequently, you more likely have something like [A:r\] for such.
Note, however, that normally one does not mark vowel length when transcribing North American English dialects simply as a matter of convention, which would make the above [Ar\]. Vowel length in NAE dialects is purely allophonic in nature, conditioned solely by the consonants following vowels (if there are any). However, I do mark it for my own dialect simply because vowel length allophony is very strong in it and it is potentially distinctive in many cases in it due to a number of different phonological phenomena such as final devoicing.
Actually, you almost certainly do not have [R] there, as such is rather rare in English dialects, and I have not heard such in use outside Wisconsin myself. Considering that I have not heard of merger of stressed "or" and "are" here in Wisconsin, or anywhere in the Upper Midwest for that matter, I doubt you have [R] here. Consequently, you more likely have something like [A:r\] for such.
Note, however, that normally one does not mark vowel length when transcribing North American English dialects simply as a matter of convention, which would make the above [Ar\]. Vowel length in NAE dialects is purely allophonic in nature, conditioned solely by the consonants following vowels (if there are any). However, I do mark it for my own dialect simply because vowel length allophony is very strong in it and it is potentially distinctive in many cases in it due to a number of different phonological phenomena such as final devoicing.
<<Actually, you almost certainly do not have [R] there, as such is rather rare in English dialects, and I have not heard such in use outside Wisconsin myself. Considering that I have not heard of merger of stressed "or" and "are" here in Wisconsin, or anywhere in the Upper Midwest for that matter, I doubt you have [R] here. Consequently, you more likely have something like [A:r\] for such.>>
Oh. That's what makes it even more confusing when attempting to learn X-sampa. The fact that some people here apparantly have "weird" r sounds. So your "r" sound is an unusual "r". I have [r\] as I have the usual "r" sound in the United States and thus [A:r\]. I'm curious as to what this [R] sounds like though. Is it a rolled r? tapped r? French r?
<<Note, however, that normally one does not mark vowel length when transcribing North American English dialects simply as a matter of convention, which would make the above [Ar\]. Vowel length in NAE dialects is purely allophonic in nature, conditioned solely by the consonants following vowels (if there are any).>>
Oh, so [:] when put after a vowel marks vowel length?
<<However, I do mark it for my own dialect simply because vowel length allophony is very strong in it and it is potentially distinctive in many cases in it due to a number of different phonological phenomena such as final devoicing.>>
Well, I sure have been learning a lot of new terms from visiting this forum. What the heck is final devoicing?
Oh. That's what makes it even more confusing when attempting to learn X-sampa. The fact that some people here apparantly have "weird" r sounds. So your "r" sound is an unusual "r". I have [r\] as I have the usual "r" sound in the United States and thus [A:r\]. I'm curious as to what this [R] sounds like though. Is it a rolled r? tapped r? French r?
<<Note, however, that normally one does not mark vowel length when transcribing North American English dialects simply as a matter of convention, which would make the above [Ar\]. Vowel length in NAE dialects is purely allophonic in nature, conditioned solely by the consonants following vowels (if there are any).>>
Oh, so [:] when put after a vowel marks vowel length?
<<However, I do mark it for my own dialect simply because vowel length allophony is very strong in it and it is potentially distinctive in many cases in it due to a number of different phonological phenomena such as final devoicing.>>
Well, I sure have been learning a lot of new terms from visiting this forum. What the heck is final devoicing?