Re: USAGE: rhotics (was: Advanced English + Babel text)

Sally Caves wrote:

>
>>
>>
>>>> By the way, I assume that English also had a trill-flap /r/
>>>> originally,
>>>> but is there any evidence on the time it was fricativized?
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm unsure what you mean by fricativized when speaking of British
>>> English
>>> pronunciation.  Do you mean "flapped"?  Retroflex?
>>
>>
>> I should have said 'approximazed' (or something alike). For what I know,
>> English /r/ may be retroflex, but not necessarily, but it's almost
>> always
>> an
>> approximant [r\], not a trill-tap (as e.g. in Scots).
>
>
> Do you mean the retroflex "r" that is not as exaggerated a sound as
> American
> retroflex "r," and spoken by a lot of Brits?  I hear that most often.
> Less
> often do I hear the "r" flapped, as in "very" or "horrid"; does it strike
> some British speakers as uppish and elite?

No, it strikes us as dead(or very nearly so).  If someone uses it, they
are certainly both old and very posh (an impression only, mind).

My /r\/, I think, is an post-alveolar approximant.  The American one is
retroflex, as far as I can tell.