''bath'' and ''Mary''

<<Yep. My mother is variably non-rhotic, but she has told me that as a child she was completely non-rhotic. My father is almost completely rhotic now, but I'm pretty sure that he was either partially or completely non-rhotic as a child.>>

It's quite apparent from 50s and 60s movies and TV shows that rhoticism was much less common in the US just four or five decades ago, and those examples of parents being more rhotic than they used to be supports that evidence. It is quite a mystery why it has become almost nationwide now. I wonder if Canada has experienced the same growth in the popularity of voicing ultimate or pre-consonantal Rs during that period.

Nigel, I don't think old movies accurately reflected the actual accents of Americans at the time. We've discussed this on this forum in the past, but what you heard in old movies was a sort of trained theatrical accent that really didn't sound like anything a normal human being would use.

<<It's quite apparent from 50s and 60s movies and TV shows that rhoticism was much less common in the US just four or five decades ago, and those examples of parents being more rhotic than they used to be supports that evidence. It is quite a mystery why it has become almost nationwide now.>>

You're overgeneralizing here. Rhoticism was certainly less common in Eastern New England and New York City, and maybe in some parts of the coastal South, four or five decades ago, but throughout the twentieth century I'm pretty sure that most of the country has always been rhotic. I've never heard any attestation of there being non-rhoticism in the Baltimore or Philadelphia areas, or anywhere in the Midwest or West. So states like Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, California, etc - to my knowledge, none of these states have ever had native non-rhotic accents.

As for old movies, I would be very wary of using those for any generalizations about how most Americans spoke. As Uriel said, actors were trained to use a traditional, theatrical, Northeastern-based accent.

Oh, and Kirk, I forgot to answer your question:

<<On another note, do you really have [E] in "feta?" I've always had [e(I)] for "feta" as with my "beta" "ate a" or "theta.">>

Yes, I do really have [E] in "feta". ;-) Actually, I'm pretty sure that /"fEt@/ is the most common pronunciation that I've heard. Dictionary.com gives both pronunciations, but with /"fEt@/ as primary, and m-w.com doesn't even list a pronunciation with /e/ at all.

But I do have [eI] in "beta", "ate a", and "theta".

<<Nigel, I don't think old movies accurately reflected the actual accents of Americans at the time. We've discussed this on this forum in the past, but what you heard in old movies was a sort of trained theatrical accent that really didn't sound like anything a normal human being would use.>>

Exactly. The great majority of North American English speakers has always been rhotic but the nonrhotic or semirhotic speech you hear in old American movies is largely a theatrical affectation and not how (most) real people spoke. After WWII there was a large-scale shift where American media began to portray people using accents that real people had.

<<You're overgeneralizing here. Rhoticism was certainly less common in Eastern New England and New York City, and maybe in some parts of the coastal South, four or five decades ago, but throughout the twentieth century I'm pretty sure that most of the country has always been rhotic. I've never heard any attestation of there being non-rhoticism in the Baltimore or Philadelphia areas, or anywhere in the Midwest or West. So states like Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, California, etc - to my knowledge, none of these states have ever had native non-rhotic accents.

As for old movies, I would be very wary of using those for any generalizations about how most Americans spoke. As Uriel said, actors were trained to use a traditional, theatrical, Northeastern-based accent. >>

Yup. North American English has always been overwhelmingly rhotic since that's how English was spoken when colonization of North America began by English speakers in the early 1600s. Only later did a few coastal areas in the US such as parts of New England and the South pick up on the new development of nonrhotacism from Southern Britain. And now studies have shown nonrhotacism to be on the wane in the parts of North America where it once was. I know especially nonrhotic Southern accents are highly recessive but nonrhotic New England accents are also receding.

The US has had its pockets of native nonrhotic speakers but I'm not sure if Canada ever had a sizable group of native nonrhotic speakers since overall it was even more isolated from 18-19th century linguistic innovations (such as nonrhotacism) in Southern Britain than the US was. The colonial loyalists from New England who fled to Canada during the American Revolutionary war would've been mostly rhotic but they, mostly "cot-caught" merged, did lay the groundwork for Canadian English which is almost completely "cot-caught" merged today (while only about 40-50% of the US is today).

<<Yes, I do really have [E] in "feta". ;-) Actually, I'm pretty sure that /"fEt@/ is the most common pronunciation that I've heard. Dictionary.com gives both pronunciations, but with /"fEt@/ as primary, and m-w.com doesn't even list a pronunciation with /e/ at all.

But I do have [eI] in "beta", "ate a", and "theta".>>

Oh ok interesting.