In my North-Western English English <can't> is [ka:n?] or [ka:~?],
definitely with a glottal stop at the end. In other contexts I've got
similar assimilations to the one Tristan described for Australian English.
"I can't always" [a"ka:~?'O:L\8z] or [a"ka:~?'O:wEz]
"can't you come" ["ka:~tS@'kUm]
<can> is [kan].
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Tristan McLeay
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:01 AM
"I'm an Australian. I would probably usually say [ka:n] for "can't" before
vowels; there's no trace of the "t" --- saying [ka:nto:lw&iz] would make you
sound very proper. Before consonants there's usually some trace at least
e.g. before /j/ it's [ka:ntS] as in "can't you come" [ka:ntS@kam]. Other
frequently unstressed words ending in -nd or -nt have similar behavior ---
and also "nt" within words, like in "twenty", the "t" can be dropped.
"Can" is either [k@n] or unexpectedly [k&n] when stressed. ("Unexpectedly"
because the regular rules would have it [k&:n], which indeed we find for the
noun and associated verb.)
--
Tristan."
Eric Christopherson wrote:
> On May 13, 2008, at 1:51 PM, Peter Collier wrote:
>> This brings to mind an old joke, which requires some familiarity
>> with the Birmingham (UK)/Black Country accent to fully appreciate:
>>
>> Q What's the difference between buffalo and bison?
>> A "Yow cor wash yer onds in a buff'low" /jau) kU: w&S j@ rOnz
>> in @ bVfflau)/ - 'you can't wash your hands in a buffalo'
>>
>> The joke being bison/basin are homophonous (/boi)sn/)
>
> That's pretty cool. Where does <cor> /kU:/ come from? Does <or>
> correspond to /U:/ in other words?
>
> On the subject of <can't>, I've heard British people on TV saying
> what sounds to me like [kA:n], but it might have a [?] at the end
> that I'm missing. It almost sounds like they're saying <can>,
> especially if you're naive about British vowels like I was a few
> years ago, and assume that American /&/ is [A] or [A:] in British
> speech.