From: "Roger Mills" <romilly@...>
Subject: Re: question on sampa representation
> Your reply, and Rachel's, are very interesting. It leads me to believe
I'm
> more of a pedant than I suspected :-)))))))
> Actually, I think it's a generational thing, bearing in mind that for some
> of you, I'm _your father's_ generation, for many of the younger members
> _your grandfather's_, and my memory of spoken English goes back to _my
> grandfather's_ generation, people who were born in the last quarter XIXC.
> So it's hardly surprising that there have been changes during my adult
life
> (the last 45 yrs or so) that might not have affected my speech. Dirk's
post
> about the merger of lax vowels (e.g. hill/heel) in his area was also
> interesting and news to me.
It seems like my own speech has also been unaffected by some of these
changes. But what's interesting is that I'm not from your father's
generation. If you're old enough to reach the keyboard, you're too old to
be my kid.
> It's likely my [U] before final/pre-cons. /l/ is in complementary
> distribution with [V] (as in cup, buck, but etc), which simply doesn't
occur
> there-- so I have no minimal pairs [...Ul# ~ ...UlC...] vs. [...Vl#
> ~...VlC...]. The velarized /l/ (which I pronounce, even in palm and balm)
> may be the causative factor. But since [U] and [V] contrast before other
> finals (book:buck, roof:rough, puss:pus etc.) they are certainly phonemic.
I pronounce the /l/ in "palm", "balm", etc., and [U] contrasts with [V],
just as it does for you.
> Either: the dialect I learned had merged /U/ and /V/ > /U/ before /l/,
and
> other dialects still keep them separate
>
> Or: my dialect represents an older ("original") stage, and later
> generations have split them up: /U/ retained if the word has a labial,
> otherwise > /V/.
I'm beginning to suspect the latter, that a sound change has gone through
the English-speaking world, leaving out some regions.
> Tristan's post showed that these sounds go all over the map in Aust.Engl.,
> hardly surprising since we all know that Au.E is Really Weird (Big
> ;-)))))))))) In fact I think it's very interesting, and regret I don't
hear
> more of it-- that dreadful Steve-crocodile-man on TV is hardly typical,
nor
> were the ANU faculty I hung around with for a few days, 30 yrs ago......)
How typical is Paul Hogan of AuE speech? He sounds different than that
Steve-crocodile-man, but both sound generally "Australian" to me. Other
than those two, I can't think of hearing any other sort of Australian
speech.
> While on the subject, I'll mention that /U/ does not occur before /p, b/
> either, but I think that's pretty universal in AE and RP(?). (Aside from
> the vulgar Yiddishism? shtoop/shtup? [StUp] = 'f*ck')
I'm thinking you're right on this one, but /Up/ and /Ub/ seem quite
plausible.