Re: Shavian rhotics (was: Optimum number of symbols)

Ray:
> At 9:54 pm +0200 24/5/02, Philip Newton wrote:
> [snip]
> >Which is probably one reason why Shavian makes a rhotic/non-rhotic
> >distinction in vowels, even though it comes from England.
>
> ..and why not. Rhotic vowels are the norm in rural dialects throughout the
> south of England & the Midlands, and are the norm in both rural and urban
> speech of all classes in the south west.  In not sure of the details in
> nortern dialects - I think And is better informed on this.  If you take the
> whole of Britain into account, and not just England, then we even have
> truly consonantal post vocalic /r/ in several regions.  It's mainly the
> urban south-east which is non-rhotic and even there most linguistically
> naive people think they pronounce an 'r' and that that is why, e.g. 'cart'
> and 'cat' are not homophones.
I had made myself swear to myself I wouldn't get involved in these
English accents threads any more! But maybe one brief lapse won't
hurt, says the addict.

Rhoticity is very recessive in the north of England, and actual
phonetic rhoticity (i.e. with /r/ realized by a rhotic rather than
by a schwa) even more recessive. In terms of sheer weight of numbers
of speakers, there is an enormous majority of nonrhotic speakers in
Britain.

> In this respect, the Shavian alphabet reflects the speech habits of much of
> England and what most of the rest perceive to be their speech habit (even
> if it ain't  :)
Although I have not studied this properly, I do get the sense that 70
years or more ago, nonrhoticity was somewhat stigmatized. The last
vestiges of that stigma -- the stigma against intrusive R -- is only
just dying out. Another now moribund instance is the stigma against
so-called 'Cockney rhyme'. And lastly, if one hears old recordings
of nonrhotic people reciting poetry or dramatic verse or very literary
prose, there is a tendency for them (a) to restore nonprevocalic
/r/, and (b) to tap /r/.

--And.

Reply