''he said "bag" with an "a" sound like in "bad", ''
I thought people in the West pronounced both words with a vowel
between [a] and [AE]...
I thought people in the West pronounced both words with a vowel
between [a] and [AE]...
What about 'Chicago Accent'?
among many other things, I have a fleeting interest in linguistics, specifically, dialects (at least more interest in them than the physics lab, physics homework, geoscience lab, English paper, philosophy paper or philosophy reading that I should be doing).
This map shows the approximate extent of the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, and thus the approximate area where the Inland North dialect predominates. Note that the region surrounding Erie, Pennsylvania is excluded; the dialect spoken there more closely resembles that of Pittsburgh.So I’ve been browsing wikipedia, and I ran into an article about something called the caught-cot merger. Apparently, it isn’t normal to pronounce those two words the same way (that is, originally they weren’t homophones). Now, I find this strange, because, to me, those two words sound exactly the same, and as much as I’ve thought about it, I can’t think of what the difference between the two words. So I looked at the map that shows the distribution of the merger. Apparently people in this area “southern Michigan” do not have the merger, so I’m going to do a little research and see if this is the case. Actually, the closest dot to TC seems to be the UP. More telling though, is the map of the Inland North American English dialect. Traverse City is not covered in this area, instead, the blue in this diagram seems to fit closely with the blue dots in the first map. In fact, one of the characteristics of this dialect is to not have undergone the cot-caught merger. So the question would then be, if I’m not that dialect, what am I? Geographically, the only other dialect in the region is North Central American English. This however, is a dialect based more on Scandinavian roots—essentially, it’s the yooper dialect, which I certainly do not have.
Area of the United States where the local accent is closest to General American So what accent do I have then? Well, probably Standard Midwestern aka. “General American” with the cot-caught merger. Why would I have this, though, when you look at the map to right, you see that I clearly don’t live there. There are 2 possible explainations for this:
1. Traverse City is pretty vanilla, and thus just adopts the general american accent w/o regional variation—esp. possible considering the large immigrant population there (intranational immigration of course).
2. Omaha is in that region—and my mother is “from” Omaha. Is it possible I would adopt my mother’s accent without adopting my father’s? Yes, since my Father seems to have lost his New York accent (except when he’s tired).
Either way I seem to have ended up with the generic-boring-normal accent. However, it does appear that I have one slight anomaly, the cot-caught merger. This merger, however, is on the rise. Places are slowly being assimilated into it. The west already has it, and even certain places out east (like, for example the boston accent, which one of my neighbours next door have) have adopted the merger. So in the end, I already have adopted the future pronunciation that will be used by general America. I can handle that.
This map shows the approximate extent of the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, and thus the approximate area where the Inland North dialect predominates. Note that the region surrounding Erie, Pennsylvania is excluded; the dialect spoken there more closely resembles that of Pittsburgh.So I’ve been browsing wikipedia, and I ran into an article about something called the caught-cot merger. Apparently, it isn’t normal to pronounce those two words the same way (that is, originally they weren’t homophones). Now, I find this strange, because, to me, those two words sound exactly the same, and as much as I’ve thought about it, I can’t think of what the difference between the two words. So I looked at the map that shows the distribution of the merger. Apparently people in this area “southern Michigan” do not have the merger, so I’m going to do a little research and see if this is the case. Actually, the closest dot to TC seems to be the UP. More telling though, is the map of the Inland North American English dialect. Traverse City is not covered in this area, instead, the blue in this diagram seems to fit closely with the blue dots in the first map. In fact, one of the characteristics of this dialect is to not have undergone the cot-caught merger. So the question would then be, if I’m not that dialect, what am I? Geographically, the only other dialect in the region is North Central American English. This however, is a dialect based more on Scandinavian roots—essentially, it’s the yooper dialect, which I certainly do not have.
Area of the United States where the local accent is closest to General American So what accent do I have then? Well, probably Standard Midwestern aka. “General American” with the cot-caught merger. Why would I have this, though, when you look at the map to right, you see that I clearly don’t live there. There are 2 possible explainations for this:
1. Traverse City is pretty vanilla, and thus just adopts the general american accent w/o regional variation—esp. possible considering the large immigrant population there (intranational immigration of course).
2. Omaha is in that region—and my mother is “from” Omaha. Is it possible I would adopt my mother’s accent without adopting my father’s? Yes, since my Father seems to have lost his New York accent (except when he’s tired).
Either way I seem to have ended up with the generic-boring-normal accent. However, it does appear that I have one slight anomaly, the cot-caught merger. This merger, however, is on the rise. Places are slowly being assimilated into it. The west already has it, and even certain places out east (like, for example the boston accent, which one of my neighbours next door have) have adopted the merger. So in the end, I already have adopted the future pronunciation that will be used by general America. I can handle that.
about the acceptance of NCVS accents: http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2007-04-10/haynie-vowelshift
and one question?
what is the shift in Minneapolis? CC merger of NCVS?
in this article, they say Minneapolis is CC merged: http://www.news.wisc.edu/12293
and one question?
what is the shift in Minneapolis? CC merger of NCVS?
in this article, they say Minneapolis is CC merged: http://www.news.wisc.edu/12293
>>I had a composition teacher in college who had spent a great deal of time in California. We had a guy in class named "Don"(you can see where this is going) and, when taking attendence the first day, we all were wondering who this new girl "Dawn" was, until the professor said Don's last name and we figured it out. What's really strange is that this particular professor grew up in Iowa, which means she either never had a midwestern accent(highly unlikely, as there are very urban centers in Iowa where non-natives might congregate) or she spent so much time in CA that she lost her accent(this is frightening for me as a Chicagoan, as I am quite proud of my accent[though it is already fading as a result of living in Lincoln Park, where nearly everyone is not from Chicago], but wish to work in Los Angeles. Friends of mine who have lived exclusively in our old neighborhood from birth to the present(we are all nearly 30 yrs. old) have retained and, in some cases, strengthened their accents to the point that I feel as though I'm being put on when I run into them. Even going to the beef stand by my parents house is like walking into an episode of Saturday Night Live's Superfanssssssss.<<
Mind you that Iowa is largely outside of the range of the NCVS, or at most on its outer fringes, and it when people say "Midwestern accent" today they seem to be primarily speaking of the presence of the NCVS.
And, I'm from Milwaukee rather than Chicago, but we definitely do use [s] for /z/ in word-final positions both here and in Chicago (with some exceptions - for instance, such devoicing often does not occur here if the next word begins with a vowel).
Mind you that Iowa is largely outside of the range of the NCVS, or at most on its outer fringes, and it when people say "Midwestern accent" today they seem to be primarily speaking of the presence of the NCVS.
And, I'm from Milwaukee rather than Chicago, but we definitely do use [s] for /z/ in word-final positions both here and in Chicago (with some exceptions - for instance, such devoicing often does not occur here if the next word begins with a vowel).
Traverse City,
That is where I am from originally. The map you are looking at is based upon William Labov's telephone survey. He never interviewed anyone in Northern Michigan, just the southern half of the lower peninsula and then the upper peninsula. Thus, he has no idea where the actual isogloss line dividing the U.P. dialect area and the NCVS affected area is.
I myself participate in several of the NCVS shifts and I can assure you that many in Traverse City do. I have lived in the "General American" area as well (I lived in Kansas City after I graduated from college), and my accent was perceived as "northern" by residents there. Living in the Detroit area now, I can tell you that the accent here is much more pronounced than in Traverse City, though. If I had to make a statement about the Traverse City accent, I would say that it is a less pronounced version of the NCVS, but that the shift is still there. It is definitely not cot/caught merged, which is a feature of the midlands and west accents that make up General American (they are either merged or close to being merged). Do you pronounce them the same? I would guess that you don't.
That is where I am from originally. The map you are looking at is based upon William Labov's telephone survey. He never interviewed anyone in Northern Michigan, just the southern half of the lower peninsula and then the upper peninsula. Thus, he has no idea where the actual isogloss line dividing the U.P. dialect area and the NCVS affected area is.
I myself participate in several of the NCVS shifts and I can assure you that many in Traverse City do. I have lived in the "General American" area as well (I lived in Kansas City after I graduated from college), and my accent was perceived as "northern" by residents there. Living in the Detroit area now, I can tell you that the accent here is much more pronounced than in Traverse City, though. If I had to make a statement about the Traverse City accent, I would say that it is a less pronounced version of the NCVS, but that the shift is still there. It is definitely not cot/caught merged, which is a feature of the midlands and west accents that make up General American (they are either merged or close to being merged). Do you pronounce them the same? I would guess that you don't.
>>http://csumc.wisc.edu/wep/
WISCONSIN ENGLISHES
Exploring the English we speak in Wisconsin<<
I really do not like that site in that it is far too superficial in its coverage of speech here in Wisconsin. It really only covers two well-known sound shifts, the NCVS and the cot-caught merger, and some well-known variations in lexicon such as "bubbler" versus "soda". The thing is that I honestly have to say that those are some of the *least* interesting things about speech at least here in the Milwaukee area.
WISCONSIN ENGLISHES
Exploring the English we speak in Wisconsin<<
I really do not like that site in that it is far too superficial in its coverage of speech here in Wisconsin. It really only covers two well-known sound shifts, the NCVS and the cot-caught merger, and some well-known variations in lexicon such as "bubbler" versus "soda". The thing is that I honestly have to say that those are some of the *least* interesting things about speech at least here in the Milwaukee area.
>> It really only covers two well-known sound shifts, the NCVS and the cot-caught merger, and some well-known variations in lexicon such as "bubbler" versus "soda". The thing is that I honestly have to say that those are some of the *least* interesting things about speech at least here in the Milwaukee area. <<
So how much of Wisconsin is cot-caught merged?
So how much of Wisconsin is cot-caught merged?
>>So how much of Wisconsin is cot-caught merged?<<
Only the western and northern extremes of Wisconsin are cot-caught-merged.
Only the western and northern extremes of Wisconsin are cot-caught-merged.
I just saw the movie ''Against the Ropes'' in which Meg Ryan puts on a Midwestern NCVS accent.
Maybe because it's acquired artificially, Meg sounds a bit off at times (she pronounced ASS with her GA/EastCoast [AE] insted of [ea]), but it's a decent try anyway.
She pronounces POSSIBLE as General American PASSIBLE, and LAST as /least/, BOX as BACKS but the funniest thing in the movie is
Meg pronouncing NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK like NEW KIDS ON THE BLACK ;)
This proved once again that Midwestern/Great Lakes region is one of the most accented areas in the US, since this pronunciation can confuse everyone, GA users, FarWest English speakers, Southern speakers, Canadian speakers and Back East speakers...
And maybe because of lack of exposure, many people outside the US Great Lakes area can found it very funny...(the media are not that much into this accent, they use either GA / West accents or Back East accents [NJ/NY accents are frequent in sitcoms, series, movies])...
If Midwestern accent were ''the standard accent'', there would be no need for Meg Ryan to ''put on the Midwestern accent'' ;)
Too bad this accent didn't suit Meg at all, she sounded like Captain Janeway from Star Trek Voyager ;)
Maybe because it's acquired artificially, Meg sounds a bit off at times (she pronounced ASS with her GA/EastCoast [AE] insted of [ea]), but it's a decent try anyway.
She pronounces POSSIBLE as General American PASSIBLE, and LAST as /least/, BOX as BACKS but the funniest thing in the movie is
Meg pronouncing NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK like NEW KIDS ON THE BLACK ;)
This proved once again that Midwestern/Great Lakes region is one of the most accented areas in the US, since this pronunciation can confuse everyone, GA users, FarWest English speakers, Southern speakers, Canadian speakers and Back East speakers...
And maybe because of lack of exposure, many people outside the US Great Lakes area can found it very funny...(the media are not that much into this accent, they use either GA / West accents or Back East accents [NJ/NY accents are frequent in sitcoms, series, movies])...
If Midwestern accent were ''the standard accent'', there would be no need for Meg Ryan to ''put on the Midwestern accent'' ;)
Too bad this accent didn't suit Meg at all, she sounded like Captain Janeway from Star Trek Voyager ;)
>>Maybe because it's acquired artificially, Meg sounds a bit off at times (she pronounced ASS with her GA/EastCoast [AE] insted of [ea]), but it's a decent try anyway.<<
Mind you that there is variation in practice with the pronunciation of historical /{/; for instance, my pronunciation of it can range from [{_r] on one hand to [i_^{] and [E3_^] on the other.
(Note that what I have transcribed as [E@_^] earlier seems to actually be [E3_^] or even something like [E6_^].)
Mind you that there is variation in practice with the pronunciation of historical /{/; for instance, my pronunciation of it can range from [{_r] on one hand to [i_^{] and [E3_^] on the other.
(Note that what I have transcribed as [E@_^] earlier seems to actually be [E3_^] or even something like [E6_^].)
I have a friend, the way he pronounces hot is "hat", and sauce "sas".. I want some hat sas lol
>>I have a friend, the way he pronounces hot is "hat", and sauce "sas".. I want some hat sas lol<<
That is interesting, as that implies that he has the cot-caught merger with the NCVS overlaid atop it, because what you said implies that he pronounces both "hot" and "sauce" with [a] or [{], while a speaker of a cot-caught-unmerged NCVS-influenced dialect should have [a] or [{] for "hot" and [Q] or [A] for "sauce". This implies that the person probably is from Minnesota or the far west of Wisconsin, as such are the primary areas where the NCVS has affected cot-caught-merged dialects.
That is interesting, as that implies that he has the cot-caught merger with the NCVS overlaid atop it, because what you said implies that he pronounces both "hot" and "sauce" with [a] or [{], while a speaker of a cot-caught-unmerged NCVS-influenced dialect should have [a] or [{] for "hot" and [Q] or [A] for "sauce". This implies that the person probably is from Minnesota or the far west of Wisconsin, as such are the primary areas where the NCVS has affected cot-caught-merged dialects.
Chicago is the strongest of the NCVS dialects, and within the area that most diverts from "General American." Here's a rundown of the features, as delineated by Labov:
*the [{] phoneme is dipthongized in all environments, becoming either [I@] or [e@]. This differs from GenAm, which only features this sound before nasals.
*The [V] in strut is often rounded, similar to many Irish dialects. Hence, "cut" is often pronounce [kOt].
*[A] in "pop" is fronted to [{] or a fronted [a].
*The "e" in "bet" is a centralized vowel, typically [@] or [3].
Some of these features sound kind of bizarre until you hear isolated words. The human mind tends to adjust to the shift fairly naturally.
*the [{] phoneme is dipthongized in all environments, becoming either [I@] or [e@]. This differs from GenAm, which only features this sound before nasals.
*The [V] in strut is often rounded, similar to many Irish dialects. Hence, "cut" is often pronounce [kOt].
*[A] in "pop" is fronted to [{] or a fronted [a].
*The "e" in "bet" is a centralized vowel, typically [@] or [3].
Some of these features sound kind of bizarre until you hear isolated words. The human mind tends to adjust to the shift fairly naturally.
Of those features, the rounding of stressed /V/ really isn't found at all here in Milwaukee. Actually, it seems to really be just [V] without any modification here. The other features are found here, except that the fronting of historical /A:/ does not reach [{], the breaking of historical /{/ tends to have a nucleus of [{] rather than [@] after an onglide, and when it does have an offglide that offglide tends to be [3] or even [6] rather than [@]. Likewise, the centering of historical /E/ is more slight than that which you describe, and does not involve any raising towards [@].