Yes, the NCVS is not too unlikely to confuse L1 learners of North American English, but the thing is that I still think it would be a bit much to expect English teachers who natively speak NCVSed dialects to change their speech to more closely fit General American, to say the very least.
W vs. WH - a Linguistic Pet Peeve
<<Yes, the NCVS is not too unlikely to confuse L1 learners of North American English, but the thing is that I still think it would be a bit much to expect English teachers who natively speak NCVSed dialects to change their speech to more closely fit General American, to say the very least.>>
No, I don't think anyone should try to change their speech when teaching it to others; all they're likely to do is to make it unnatural and forced and confuse them. What I meant is that language schools should be cautious when hiring NCVS affected teachers and should make sure that students are aware of the differences in pronunciation with General American. The important thing is that students understand that what their teacher is saying is a regional variety and also how that variety relates to the rest of the country.
No, I don't think anyone should try to change their speech when teaching it to others; all they're likely to do is to make it unnatural and forced and confuse them. What I meant is that language schools should be cautious when hiring NCVS affected teachers and should make sure that students are aware of the differences in pronunciation with General American. The important thing is that students understand that what their teacher is saying is a regional variety and also how that variety relates to the rest of the country.
NCVS is definitely less standard than CC merger (CC merged forms are 1. indicated in 1. Longman pronouncing dictionary as variants in American English [it seems the author, JC Wells likes traditional GA better]; 2. Cambridge pronouncing dictionary as only options in American English [it author Daniel Jones likes modern GA- CC merged]
NCVS is a regional feature (just like Southern shift, Californian shift or Canadian shift)...CotCaught merger is more of a variant, being 1. the norm in Canadian English (Canadian media use it)*; 2. a variant in US English (US media try to hide it, only local tvs/radios/movies use it)...
General American without CC merger - traditional GA
GA with CC merger - modern GA
GA with shift (NCVS, Californian shift, Canadian shift) - regional GA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*in Atlantic Canada, there's CC merger with no shifts
in other parts of Canada there's an ongoing merger...most men
don't show this merger...it's also dependent on the region - ottawa women have [Q] where non merged Alberta girls and all Atlantic girls
have [A] (Cot, Caught)
NCVS is a regional feature (just like Southern shift, Californian shift or Canadian shift)...CotCaught merger is more of a variant, being 1. the norm in Canadian English (Canadian media use it)*; 2. a variant in US English (US media try to hide it, only local tvs/radios/movies use it)...
General American without CC merger - traditional GA
GA with CC merger - modern GA
GA with shift (NCVS, Californian shift, Canadian shift) - regional GA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*in Atlantic Canada, there's CC merger with no shifts
in other parts of Canada there's an ongoing merger...most men
don't show this merger...it's also dependent on the region - ottawa women have [Q] where non merged Alberta girls and all Atlantic girls
have [A] (Cot, Caught)
>>No, I don't think anyone should try to change their speech when teaching it to others; all they're likely to do is to make it unnatural and forced and confuse them. What I meant is that language schools should be cautious when hiring NCVS affected teachers and should make sure that students are aware of the differences in pronunciation with General American. The important thing is that students understand that what their teacher is saying is a regional variety and also how that variety relates to the rest of the country. <<
I myself would be against schools being "cautious" when hiring teachers who happen to speak NCVS-affected dialects, as that implies them selectively prefering teachers who do not have such. However, I do think it is a good idea for schools to make students aware of shifts such as the NCVS not just because teachers may happen to have such but also because students will encounter native speakers with such shifts in Real Life.
I myself would be against schools being "cautious" when hiring teachers who happen to speak NCVS-affected dialects, as that implies them selectively prefering teachers who do not have such. However, I do think it is a good idea for schools to make students aware of shifts such as the NCVS not just because teachers may happen to have such but also because students will encounter native speakers with such shifts in Real Life.
>>GA with CC merger - modern GA<<
Mind you that a majority of English-speakers in the US still lack the cot-caught merger, and hence I would not say that "modern GA" is necessarily cot-caught-merged, even if there are many GA-like dialects today, especially in the western US, which are cot-caught-merged.
Mind you that a majority of English-speakers in the US still lack the cot-caught merger, and hence I would not say that "modern GA" is necessarily cot-caught-merged, even if there are many GA-like dialects today, especially in the western US, which are cot-caught-merged.
<<*in Atlantic Canada, there's CC merger with no shifts
in other parts of Canada there's an ongoing merger...most men
don't show this merger...it's also dependent on the region - ottawa women have [Q] where non merged Alberta girls and all Atlantic girls
have [A] (Cot, Caught)>>
I don't know where you got this information. I live in Ottawa, and I can safely say that the cot-caught merger is 100% complete among both men and women here. I don't think even seniors make this distinction. There records of cot-caught merging going back to the 1850's or so, so I don't think the merger can be said to be ongoing in any way. Also, I would analyse the sound in cot, caught as [A] rather than [Q], simply because the sounds traditionally written with [Q] sound foreign to my ears. (eg. 'top' in RP, 'talk' in GAm).
in other parts of Canada there's an ongoing merger...most men
don't show this merger...it's also dependent on the region - ottawa women have [Q] where non merged Alberta girls and all Atlantic girls
have [A] (Cot, Caught)>>
I don't know where you got this information. I live in Ottawa, and I can safely say that the cot-caught merger is 100% complete among both men and women here. I don't think even seniors make this distinction. There records of cot-caught merging going back to the 1850's or so, so I don't think the merger can be said to be ongoing in any way. Also, I would analyse the sound in cot, caught as [A] rather than [Q], simply because the sounds traditionally written with [Q] sound foreign to my ears. (eg. 'top' in RP, 'talk' in GAm).
in Ottawa, yes, the merger [cot/caught] is present,
but many female speakers show the CANADIAN SHIFT...
Listen to ''Ottawa news at 6''...
lost, cot/caught, Paul, dollar shift from [lAst, kAt, pAl, dAl@r] to [lQst, kQt, pQl, dQl@r] so the merged vowel it's more British sounding (even Oxford canadian dictionary uses Q instead of A; the same sound used in Oxford advanced learner's dictionary]...so British and shiftedCanadian ''cot, dollar'' sound both [kQt, dQl@r] unlike General American cot [kAt, dAl@r] and Atlantic Canada cot/caught [kAt, dAl@r]
for example, Ottawa news at 6' Lucy pronounces LAUNCHE [lQntS] (British-like and NYC-like) instead of [lAntS] (Atlantic Canada, Western US without Californian shift)
non shifted Canadian pronunciation: Toronto [t@'rAn(t)o(u)] (with [A])
shifted Canadian pronunciation: Toronto [t@'rQn(t)o(u)] (with [Q])
[A] the older non shifted Canadian pronunciation (the only one used in Atlantic Canada)
[Q] is the shifted one
[A] sounds more American, [Q] sounds more British
but many female speakers show the CANADIAN SHIFT...
Listen to ''Ottawa news at 6''...
lost, cot/caught, Paul, dollar shift from [lAst, kAt, pAl, dAl@r] to [lQst, kQt, pQl, dQl@r] so the merged vowel it's more British sounding (even Oxford canadian dictionary uses Q instead of A; the same sound used in Oxford advanced learner's dictionary]...so British and shiftedCanadian ''cot, dollar'' sound both [kQt, dQl@r] unlike General American cot [kAt, dAl@r] and Atlantic Canada cot/caught [kAt, dAl@r]
for example, Ottawa news at 6' Lucy pronounces LAUNCHE [lQntS] (British-like and NYC-like) instead of [lAntS] (Atlantic Canada, Western US without Californian shift)
non shifted Canadian pronunciation: Toronto [t@'rAn(t)o(u)] (with [A])
shifted Canadian pronunciation: Toronto [t@'rQn(t)o(u)] (with [Q])
[A] the older non shifted Canadian pronunciation (the only one used in Atlantic Canada)
[Q] is the shifted one
[A] sounds more American, [Q] sounds more British
try Ottawa News at 6 Regional Newscast at
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#
at 02:56 dollars [dQl@rz] instead of [dAl@rz]...
at 06:21 province ['prQvIns] instead of ['prAvIns]
[dQlrz, prQvIns] is
1. Canadian pronunciation with the Canadian shift
2. WesternUS pronunciation with the Californian shift
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#
at 02:56 dollars [dQl@rz] instead of [dAl@rz]...
at 06:21 province ['prQvIns] instead of ['prAvIns]
[dQlrz, prQvIns] is
1. Canadian pronunciation with the Canadian shift
2. WesternUS pronunciation with the Californian shift
Sorry, I misunderstood what you wrote above, I thought you were referring to the cot-caught merger spreading throughout Canada. Here is a good page with information about the Canadian Shift. http://www.ic.arizona.edu/~lsp/Canadian/canphon2.html (Note that this site uses 'a' to transcribe [A]).
There is nothing about the LOT lexical set being involved in the shift. I have noticed the use of a rounded vowel in this set though, but only in artificial situations: the synthesized speech of a phone message, CBC news reports, etc. The only major differences between my speech (which is fairly characteristic of Ottawa and Central/Western Canada as a whole, in the vowels at least) and General American are a. the cot-caught merger, b. Canadian raising, and c. a backer, lower [{], almost [a]. As I said above, my PALM/START/LOT sound [A] is approximately the same as that of GAm, and quite different from RP's LOT or GAm's THOUGHT/CLOTH (both often transcribed as [Q]).
There is nothing about the LOT lexical set being involved in the shift. I have noticed the use of a rounded vowel in this set though, but only in artificial situations: the synthesized speech of a phone message, CBC news reports, etc. The only major differences between my speech (which is fairly characteristic of Ottawa and Central/Western Canada as a whole, in the vowels at least) and General American are a. the cot-caught merger, b. Canadian raising, and c. a backer, lower [{], almost [a]. As I said above, my PALM/START/LOT sound [A] is approximately the same as that of GAm, and quite different from RP's LOT or GAm's THOUGHT/CLOTH (both often transcribed as [Q]).
I too would be against schools' being "cautious" when hiring teachers who happen to speak NCVS-affected dialects (you make it sound like some sort of plague).
Everyone speaks a regional variety of English. Any English learner with their wits about them shouldn't take long to realise this but yes, it is helpful for schools (i.e. teachers) to point this out (and elaborate on it).
Perhaps it may be useful to make the distinction between ESL & EFL by which I mean the study of English respectively within & outside of an English speaking country.
In the case of ESL you've got the local dialect to compare other dialects to. No such luxury exists in the case of EFL.
A decent ESL school will be careful to employ professional ESL teachers. A professional ESL teacher will have concern for the students and will want to teach them as best as he can.
A professional ESL teacher should have some knowledge of their own dialect and of the local dialect. Such a teacher should have some knowledge of how his dialect differs from that of the local dialect. You can therefore conclude that he'll make the students aware of this too.
When it comes to EFL it makes no sense to talk of the local dialect or of how a "regional variety ... to the rest of the country" since this is not English anyway. When it comes to EFL teachers everyone is speaking a dialect from another region.
Similarly, however, you should expect to find that good EFL schools have teachers who are willing and able to point out to students how their particular dialect relates to the other dialects of English.
Everyone speaks a regional variety of English. Any English learner with their wits about them shouldn't take long to realise this but yes, it is helpful for schools (i.e. teachers) to point this out (and elaborate on it).
Perhaps it may be useful to make the distinction between ESL & EFL by which I mean the study of English respectively within & outside of an English speaking country.
In the case of ESL you've got the local dialect to compare other dialects to. No such luxury exists in the case of EFL.
A decent ESL school will be careful to employ professional ESL teachers. A professional ESL teacher will have concern for the students and will want to teach them as best as he can.
A professional ESL teacher should have some knowledge of their own dialect and of the local dialect. Such a teacher should have some knowledge of how his dialect differs from that of the local dialect. You can therefore conclude that he'll make the students aware of this too.
When it comes to EFL it makes no sense to talk of the local dialect or of how a "regional variety ... to the rest of the country" since this is not English anyway. When it comes to EFL teachers everyone is speaking a dialect from another region.
Similarly, however, you should expect to find that good EFL schools have teachers who are willing and able to point out to students how their particular dialect relates to the other dialects of English.
I think I worded by comment above badly. I hope I didn't offend anyone. Yes, I think a distinction between ESL and EFL is important. For ESL students in the US, teachers affected by the NCVS are fine, perhaps even useful to the student to experience the local variety of American English. Yet for EFL teachers, I don't think any strong regionalisms are really acceptable. Students in say, Korea, will likely be dealing with non-NCVS Americans when they use English; having an NCVS-affected teacher will have double the "distance" between their accents and make communication more difficult. When I mentioned NCVS, that was only the most prominent example. The cot-caught merger would probably not be acceptable either, nor of course would the pin-pen merger, the Southern shift, the California shift, etc. I'm going to 'hedge' what I said above again; if the EFL students have several teachers, one of whom is NCVS-affected, or cot-caught merged, etc. I don't think there's a problem. This might even be useful, as I mentioned above. But students with only one teacher, who is NCVS-affected will, I think, be harder to understand for native English speakers.
Uriel wrote:
>>Once upon a time people apparently pronounced the K in knife and knot. No one does anymore.<<
LOL, in Norwegian we do!
>>Once upon a time people apparently pronounced the K in knife and knot. No one does anymore.<<
LOL, in Norwegian we do!
>>I think I worded by comment above badly. I hope I didn't offend anyone. Yes, I think a distinction between ESL and EFL is important. For ESL students in the US, teachers affected by the NCVS are fine, perhaps even useful to the student to experience the local variety of American English. Yet for EFL teachers, I don't think any strong regionalisms are really acceptable. Students in say, Korea, will likely be dealing with non-NCVS Americans when they use English; having an NCVS-affected teacher will have double the "distance" between their accents and make communication more difficult. When I mentioned NCVS, that was only the most prominent example. The cot-caught merger would probably not be acceptable either, nor of course would the pin-pen merger, the Southern shift, the California shift, etc. I'm going to 'hedge' what I said above again; if the EFL students have several teachers, one of whom is NCVS-affected, or cot-caught merged, etc. I don't think there's a problem. This might even be useful, as I mentioned above. But students with only one teacher, who is NCVS-affected will, I think, be harder to understand for native English speakers.<<
The matter, though, is that in practice North American English has a significant range of dialects affected by a number of different sound shifts, including the NCVS, the California Vowel Shift, the Canadian Vowel Shift, and the Southern Vowel Shift, aside from dialects in the Northeast which lack many of the mergers characteristic of much of NAE. Note that the NCVS is just the most prominent of these shifts due to it being relatively old and thus rather strongly expressed compared to, say, the Canadian Vowel Shift.
If one really wants truly General American-like dialects, one is largely limited to Western NAE dialects, and then even they are cot-caught merged and are practically regional in nature today. As one really cannot go and exclude English teachers for EFL just because they do not speak Western NAE dialects, one would have to figure out some way of teaching EFL students without relying on some (largely fictional) kind of "neutral" or "non-regional" NAE variety.
The matter, though, is that in practice North American English has a significant range of dialects affected by a number of different sound shifts, including the NCVS, the California Vowel Shift, the Canadian Vowel Shift, and the Southern Vowel Shift, aside from dialects in the Northeast which lack many of the mergers characteristic of much of NAE. Note that the NCVS is just the most prominent of these shifts due to it being relatively old and thus rather strongly expressed compared to, say, the Canadian Vowel Shift.
If one really wants truly General American-like dialects, one is largely limited to Western NAE dialects, and then even they are cot-caught merged and are practically regional in nature today. As one really cannot go and exclude English teachers for EFL just because they do not speak Western NAE dialects, one would have to figure out some way of teaching EFL students without relying on some (largely fictional) kind of "neutral" or "non-regional" NAE variety.
I went to a private school in California and we were taught that the upper classes pronounced it "hw" and the middle and lower classes pronounced it "w"...