<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: free variation in
pronunciation</title></head><body>
<div>A very good example of the sort I was referring to before, in
which report of free variation disappears when the data are examined.
In this case (with "wake") I can offer some data and
statistical analysis from Michigan. It's in<font face="Times"
size="+2" color="#000000"> Dennis R. Preston. 1996.
(a)w{o,a}ke(en)(ed) (up). J. Klemola, M. Kytö, and M. Rissanen
(eds), Speech past and present: Studies in English dialectology in
memory of Ossi Ihalainen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp.
343-84. The variation found in this study was very far from 'free'
(and completely below the conscious awareness of the
speakers).</font></div>
<div><font face="Times" size="+2" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Times" size="+2" color="#000000">dInIs</font><br>
<font face="Times" size="+2" color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>A. Murie <sagehen@WESTELCOM.COM>
writes:<br>
<br>
>>>>><br>
Roof and root are both examples where it seems to me that whether
the<br>
double o is pronounced as in /good/ or as in /food/ is pretty free.
At<br>
least I might say either at any time without noticing that I was
making a<br>
choice. Whether this is also true for hoof, I'm less sure, though I
know<br>
both pronunciations are used, but perhaps by different people.<br>
<<<<<<br>
<br>
Which brings to mind a different kind of potential free variation to
look<br>
for: strong vs. weak forms. Hooves/hoofs, leaped/leapt,
dove/dived.<br>
<br>
-- Mark</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>-- <br>
Dennis R. Preston<br>
Department of Linguistics and Languages<br>
Michigan State University<br>
East Lansing MI 48824-1027 USA<br>
preston@pilot.msu.edu<br>
Office: (517)353-0740<br>
Fax: (517)432-2736</div>
</body>
</html>