Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: YAEPT: apparently bizarre 'A's (was Re: YEAPT: f/T (was Re: Other Vulgar Lat

From:caeruleancentaur <caeruleancentaur@...>
Date:Wednesday, February 22, 2006, 18:40
--- In, "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> wrote:

>Thus, "harT" represents /hA:T/ in AusE and /ha`r\T/ or thereabouts
in >GenAmE.
>> For me they are: /ha3T/, /h3d/, /3T/, /sta3/, and /v3s/; but then >>I'm an American :-)
>A non-rhotic American, apparently. Where are you from more >specifically?
It has been my experience that, for many Americans, the question "where are you from" is not a good indicator of accent. Many of us have been very mobile in our lives. I was born in southern California of parents from New Jersey. Neither of them had an accent distinguishable as being from some particular place. When I was seven years old we moved to Tidewater Virgina, a place with a definite regional accent, which I never acquired. Fifteen years ago I moved to Virginian Appalachia, another area with a definite regional accent. I checked out Wikipedia's article "General American" and have come to the conclusion that I speak General American. I have the speech patterns described in the article with the exception that I do not make the wine/whine merger, but that is a learned response on my part. If my [r] is /3/, doesn't that make me a rhotic American? My [r] is still there. I am under the impression that non-rhotic means no sound where there is an [r], as in /hA:t/. If the pronunciation is /hA:rt/ or /hA:3t/ or /hA:4t/ or even /hA:Rt/, then the speaker is rhotic. I realize, in investigating this, that I don't see a difference between /r/ and /3/. Do I assume correctly that /r/ is consonantal <red> and /3/ is vocalic <nurse>. And I've long wondered how [r] has come to be the grapheme for such variant phonemes as /r(or 4)/, /3/, /r\/, and /R/. Charlie


Roger Mills <rfmilly@...>
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
R A Brown <ray@...>
John Vertical <johnvertical@...>