LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.10.31 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 01.NOV.2002 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.lowlands-l.net>  Email: admin at lowlands-l.net
 Rules & Guidelines: <http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
 To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
 text from the same account to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or
 sign off at <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
 L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic
               V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: George M Gibault <gmg at direct.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.10.31 (12) [E]

Ron and Elsie,

Canadian ou is not IPA [uw] or IPA [u:] or [o:] either. My keyboard doesn't
have the right sign but imagine the following without the crossbar on the
capital "A" and you will have the correct IPA
[Auw] - the first element is like a stronger longer schwa - about half way
between the vowels in English "a" and English "cut". This is true in
standard Canadian English from coast to coast but some of the Eastern
dialects -- especially rural ones have different pronunciations due to
Scots or Irish influences.
Sorry about "Val vark" I mistakenly put two separate words together. I'll
be way more careful in future!

You are completely right, Elsie, about your test to separate Americans and
Canadians - but our "out" is our own - not the Scottish one! Another good
test is "nice" where we also have the strong schwa followed by IPA ij
["A"ij]. In my phonetic spelling of some of my poems, I spell this
Canadianism 'nuys" whereas I would spell what I hear most Americans saying
as "nahiss" or in some states "naahs".

Alle die beste                  George

----------

From: robert bowman bowman at montana.com
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.10.31 (12) [E]

On Thursday 31 October 2002 17:32,  Reinhard wrote:
> There are two kinds of "route" in the US: the one that rhymes with "loot"
> and the one that rhymes with "lout".

I seem to flip between the two almost randomly. There are a few words like
'crick' for a small stream that I'll modify to the standard 'creek' if I'm
being more formal, but the rout/root variations seem equally acceptable.
I've
never noticed a strong regional pattern either.

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language varieties

Robert,

What about "measure"?  Do you pronounce it as "mayzhr" or as "mezzhr"?  And
what about "roof"?  With a long "oo" or with a short one as in "put"?  (The
same goes for "hoof".)

George:

> [Auw] - the first element is like a stronger longer schwa - about half way
> between the vowels in English "a" and English "cut".

Indeed, he's got it!  Yeah, that's it I think (finally stopping to mumble
the sound).  Yes, the second component seems to be tense [u] rather than lax
[U].

(By the way, the SAMPA [http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/home.htm]
representation is [Vuw].)

Thanks.

Reinhard/Ron

----------

From: Ed Alexander <edsells at cogeco.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.10.31 (12) [E]

At 04:32 PM 10/31/02 -0800, Elsie wrote:
>out is pronounced /oot/
>about is pronounced /aboot/
>route is pronounced /rout/ rhyming with 'bout'.

I glad this works for you, but, unfortunately, there are two North American
ways of pronouncing "route", "ruut" and "rowt", with Canadjun generally
preferring the former.  As Ron says, and as I mentioned, it is more as if
the Canadjun pronunciation is closer to the way it is spelled, namely "o-u".

>I hear the "funny" Canadian "ou" (which not *all* Canadians have) not as a
>monophthong [u:] but as a slightly rising diphthong, something like [oU].

In Canada, too, local pronunciation is less respected than more "General
American" and, as a Speaker of Canadjun as a Second Language, also find
myself shifting back and forth depending on the circumstances.  Too bad, eh?

Ed Alexander

==================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
  <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =======================================================================