Americans don't pronounce ''cot'' with an [O] sound/

<<now the difference bettwen the vowel sound in For and Far it's disappearing in usa,
i give it twenty years untill it sounds backward not to pronounce for and far the same.>>

Um, not really. There are a few isolated North American dialects that merge those sounds, called the "cord-card" merger, but it by no means is indicative of the vast majority of North American speakers. For example, I am "cot-caught" merged but I do have /O/ in two positions (it's just not phonemically distinctive, of course), in the diphthong /OI/ (as in "boy") and before /r/, in which it's very rounded, and sounds absolutely nothing like the /A/ I use in "cot-caught." For me:

for [fOr\]
sauce [sAs]
George [dZOr\dZ]
call [k_hA5]
saw [sA]
small [smA5]
dall [fA5]
more [mOr\]
sore [sOr\]
dorm [dOr\m]
wall [wA5]
talk [t_hAk]
walk [wAk]

horrible ["hOr\Ib5=]
forest ["fOr\Ist]
Florida ["flOr\I4@]

<<Cot and caught don't sound the same. Against me? Use a dictionary and search them.

In America
cot (kAt)
caught (kOt)
cat (kæt)>>

Yes, that's one set of ways to pronounce those words. However, true dialectal variation in North America is thankfully much more varied and interesting than some dictionaries would have us believe, and the truth is that about half of the US has the same vowel for "cot-caught" and about half don't. Canada is *mostly* "cot-caught" merged thruout.

<<Yes, that's one set of ways to pronounce those words. However, true dialectal variation in North America is thankfully much more varied and interesting than some dictionaries would have us believe, and the truth is that about half of the US has the same vowel for "cot-caught" and about half don't. Canada is *mostly* "cot-caught" merged thruout.>>

I know that much better than how you can imagine. I've have studied many kinds of English accents. Also I've compared and how English looks in Spanish spellings and for foreigners' advantage. It's like my hobby job in a spare time. Most of Americans don't pronounce ''law'' right when they usually pronounce it and /lA/ instead of the British /lO/. I pronounce and /lO/.

Willy,

=>I've have studied many kinds of English accents.<=

Can you really study English accents?Like at a univercity?Or do you mean that you 'just' studied them?

At last we have a new spelling.

The English has a beautiful spoken pronunciation, but the spelling is not at all considered logical. Recent studies, people have criticized this.
sweat ------- swet "new spelling"

buy ------- bei "new spelling"
by ------- bei "new spelling"

see ------- see
sea ------- see

peace ------- peess
piece ------- peess

thought ------- thaut
that ------- dhat

sick ------- sik
been ------- bin

school ------- skool
skunk ------- skunk

bite ------- beit

new ------- new

beauty ------- beuty

science ------- sience

fool ------- fool

book ------- bwauk

glue ------- glue

what ------- hwot or wot

The United States gives rights to everybody. Why isn't the new spelling tolerated and ignored, but unacceptable?

The American eagle dhe ameriken eagaul "new spelling"
The White House dha hweit houss "new spelling"

Why do some persons not want and spelling changed?

see ------- see
sea ------- sea

peace ------- peass
piece ------- peess

>>now the difference bettwen the vowel sound in For and Far it's disappearing in usa,
i give it twenty years untill it sounds backward not to pronounce for and far the same.<<

Nah, I strongly disagree. Around here in southeastern Wisconsin at least, and in much of what I hear, /A/ and /O/ are kept distinctly different, and there are no signs of them merging any time soon. (One of may major language-related pet peeves is when individuals claim things like, say, the "cot"-"cought" merger are "almost" universal in NAE, when they really aren't at all.)

Of course, though, in my case this is a bit interesting because I don't use /O/ in cases like "for", but rather /o/ (/O/ doesn't exist before /r/ in my dialect), even though at times it may be a very, very backed /o/, but that's another story.

>>If you don't live in usa ,want to make sure or just don't believe it just pay attention to the way actors pronounce words in the different american tv shows,<<

Sorry, but no, this is not nearly as universal within NAE as you may want to believe. But anyways, here's how I pronounce these given words:

"for" : /for/ -> [fo:r\]
"sauce" : /sOs/ -> [sOs] (do you mean "sauce" by "sause"?)
"George" : /dZordZ/ -> [dZo:r\dZ]
"call" : /kOl/ -> [k_hO:5]
"saw" : /sO/ -> [sO]
"small" : /smOl/ -> [smO:5]
"fall" : /fOl/ -> [fO:5]
"more" : /mor/ -> [mo:r\]
"sore" : /sor/ -> [so:r\]
"dorm" : /dorm/ -> [do:r\m]
"wall" : /wOl/ -> [wO:5]
"talk" : /tOk/ -> [t_hOk]
"walk" : /wOk/ -> [wOk]

I pronounce them the same

<<I pronounce them the same>>

~Viva la Revolución~,

Do you mean ''for'' and ''far'', or ''cot'' and ''caught''?

I assume you mean that you pronounce ''cot'' and ''caught'' the same, since that is more widespread than pronouncing ''card'' and ''cord'' the same.

I am a student in china
In our country,its seems that there are little different in these words

Here we go again,
first of all, there's a major difference between "for" and "sauce", the first is followed by an "R". It is not true that most americans pronunce "far" and "for" or "mar" and "more" the same, they sound totally different.

Why? Because of the "R" present after the vowels, however, I know there's an accent here that has that feature.

Do I know what accent that is? no,
Why? because I didn't know it existed until I read it once on this website and that was a long time ago. All I can remember is that it is very rare and you will probable never see anybody talking in that particular way on T.V.

Somebody said that Caught and Cot don't sound the same and that if we want to verify we should search them in a dictionary.

Well, I don't think we americans have a dictionary that really represents us, most of the features that makes us sound american are not included in any dictionary.

Why? who knows, maybe somebody in this forum can farther assist us.

Willy=Weird.

Is Willy American??

>Cat is k-æ-t in America but k-ah-t in most territories and of British Isles.<

Are you really claiming that "in most territories and of British Isles" cat is pronounced with a broad A as in "father"?

Perhaps you were thinking of "cart", which non-rhotically is pronounced "kaht".

<<Are you really claiming that "in most territories and of British Isles" cat is pronounced with a broad A as in "father"?

Perhaps you were thinking of "cart", which non-rhotically is pronounced "kaht". >>

Such is the problem with not using phonetic transcriptions. "kaht" is really vague.

"Why do some persons not want and [sic] spelling changed?"

Because it's not worth either the effort or the cost.