Re: CHAT: Blandness (was: Uusisuom's influences)

John Cowan wrote:
>
> Oskar Gudlaugsson scripsit:
>
> > Mm, no; 'pot', 'lot', 'rather' all have [Q], AFAIK. [A] is rare or non-
> > existent in English dialects (right?).
>
> Not at all; it is very common.  I think [Q] is not common anywhere;
> the words you mention have [O] in RP, Canadian English, and New
> England American ENglish; and [A] in the other American English
> dialects.  But "father" has [A] everywhere in North America
> except in New England, and words written with "ar" do too.
"Canadian English" again. It's all nonsense, I say. There is no one
"Canadian" English, as much as there isn't one "American" English, or as
much as every person in Britain doesn't speak RP. I speak English very
differently from someone out East, or someone in the praries. So the
phrase "Canadian English" really does offend my sensibilities. Just a
pet peeve of mine.

I have [O] in "pot", "lot", and "father", and [&] in "rather". Come to
think of it, I actually might not have [A] at all. *major realization*
That explains why some American dialects grate on me so much - sounds
like they're saying /c&fi/ for "coffee". That's probably because they're
using [A] where I'd use [O].

Also, I don't think I have [@] (or is that [2]?), I have [V] everywhere.
At least, that's if IPA Help is anything to go by.

--
Robert

Reply