Re: Not phonetic but ___???

Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 06:00:22PM +0300, Steg Belsky wrote:
> > Now [&e] is what sounds Texan to me!
>
> Well, I'm in Georgia, which isn't too far off accentwise. :)  Overall I
> don't have much of a typical Southern accent, but I suspect that the
> alteration of /&/ before voiced velars is indeed due to Southern
> influence: "back" /b&k/ is [b&k], but "bag" /b&g/ is [b&eg]; "ban" /b&n/
> is [b&n], but "bang" /b&N/ is [b&eN].
That breaking/diphthongization/whatever of low front V before voiced velars
is fairly common (tho the phonetics may differ) simply because the tongue is
making a large movement.

A major difference with the NYC vowel under discussion is that _that_ change
began before dentals / t d n / -- and even at last reports, if not mistaken,
is not yet categorical, i.e. doesn't affect _every_ such instance.

 > The vowel used in N'Yawk that i wrote as [e@] probably actually starts
> > in between [e] and [E], but that's definitely what it sounds like to
> > me.
If I were going to imitate the Southern /&/, it would sound more or less
like the nucleus in "Hyatt", [aj@], whereas the NYC bed/bad vowel is more
[E_+j@] with a much more fronted and higher onset (you could transcribe it
as "raised [E]" or "lowered [e]").

> > There are places out on Long(g) Island where all their vowels sound
> > like either [e@] or [O@]  :)
>
The stereotypical examples are bed-bad and sure-shore.