LL-L "Phonology' 2007.02.18 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L - 18 February 2007 - Volume 02

=========================================================================

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

Folks,

I've become aware of a phonological phenomenon that I consider transitional,
a phenomenon of which many of you are likely to be aware already, especially
those in or from the northeastern United States.

In the following SAMPA representations are parenthesized.

As many of you are aware, many English dialects of Massachusetts are
"non-rhotic." In this they are like English dialects of Australia, New
Zealand and Southern England, also of other parts of the US east coast and
southeast, and also like most Low Saxon dialects. "Non-rhotic" means that a
syllable-final /r/ is "deleted" or "dropped." Technically speaking, it
becomes a vowel and in many cases is assimilated to the preceding vowel,
resulting in a long vowel.

As I have mentioned on previous occasions, Northern Low Saxon shares with
Australian and New Zealand English the pronunciation [aː] ([a:]) for the
sequence /ar/ (as opposed to [ɑː] ([A:]) or [ɒː] ([Q:]) in most Southern
England dialects, as opposed to rhotic [æɻ] ([&r\`]) in Irish English, [ɒɻ]
([Qr\`]) in American English and [aɻ] ([ar\`]) in Canadian English).

Examples of identical pronunciation (but not necessarily identical meanings)
in Australia/NZ English and in Northern Low Saxon:

"bar" : *Bar* [baː] ([ba:]) '(drinking) bar'
"car" : Karr [kʰaː] ([k_ha:]) 'cart'
"cark" : Kark [kʰaːk] ([k_ha:k]) 'church'
"harm" : *Harm* [haːm] ([ha:m]) 'harm'
"harp" : *Harp* [haːp] ([ha:p]) 'harp'
"heart" : *Hart* [haːt] ([ha:t]) 'heart'
"mark" : *Mark* [maːk] ([ma:k]) 'mark', 'brand'
"Mars" : *Mars* [maːs] ([ma:s]) 'Mars'
"park" : *Park* [pʰaːk] ([p_ha:k]) 'park'
"stark" : *stark* [staːk] ([sta:k]) 'strong'

Now, in many traditional (now endangered) English dialects of Massachusetts
this is similar, except that in many of them the vowel is higher (as in
Irish English, though non-rhotic):

bar [baː] ~ [bæː] ([ba:] ~ [b&:])
car [kʰaː] ~ [kʰæː] ([k_ha:] ~ [k_h&:])
guard [gaːd] ~ [gæːd] ([ga:d] ~ [g&:d])
harm [haːm] ~ [hæːm] ([ha:m] ~ [h&:m])
harp [haːp] ~ [hæːp] ([ha:p] ~ [h&:p])
heart [haːt] ~ [hæːt] ([ha:t] ~ [h&:t])
mark [maːk] ~ [mæːk] ([ma:k] ~ [m&:k])
Mars [maːs] ~ [mæːs] ([ma:s] ~ [m&:s])
park [pʰaːk] ~ [pʰæːk] ([p_ha:k] ~ [p_h&:k])
stark [staːk] ~ [stæːk] ([sta:k] ~ [st&:k])

Massachusetts English "bar" may thus sound like "educated" Southern England
English "bear" and "bare": [bæː] ([b&:], as opposed to Australian English [b
ɛː] and New Zealand English [beː] ([be:])) and "car" like "educated"
Southern England English "care": [kʰæː] ([k_h&:], as opposed to Australian
English [kʰɛː] ([k_hE:]) and New Zealand English [kʰeː] ([k_he:])).

Now to the "discovery." Last week I listened to two speeches given by men
from Massachusetts, and I had plenty of time and material to "analyze" their
speech patterns. As everywhere in North America, non-rhotic
Massachusettsdialects are now becoming rhotic. Both speakers
pronounced syllable-final
/-r/, one of them consistently and the other close to consistently (leading
me to believe that this was not his native phonology). Both of the vocalic
variants shown above where represented, making one of them share the /ar/
sequence with many Irish English dialects

bar [baɻ] ~ [bæɻ] ([bar\`] ~ [b&r\`])
car [kʰaɻ] ~ [kʰæɻ] ([k_har\`] ~ [k_h&r\`])
guard [gaɻd] ~ [gæɻd] ([gar\`d] ~ [g&r\`d])
harm [haɻm] ~ [hæɻm] ([har\`m] ~ [h&r\`m])
harp [haɻp] ~ [hæɻp] ([har\`m] ~ [h&r\`m])
heart [haɻt] ~ [hæɻt] ([har\`t] ~ [h&r\`t])
mark [maɻk] ~ [mæɻk] ([mar\`k] ~ [m&r\`k])
Mars [maɻs] ~ [mæɻs] ([mar\`s] ~ [m&r\`s])
park [pʰaɻk] ~ [pʰæɻk] ([p_har\`k] ~ [p_h&r\`k])
stark [staɻk] ~ [stæɻk] ([star\`k] ~ [st&r\`k])

"Car" [kʰæɻ] ([k_&r\`]) is distinguished from "care" [kʰɛɻ] ([k_hEr\`]) by
the use of a different (lower) vowel.

It has long been my theory that Massachusetts English [aː] ~ [æː] ([a:] ~
[&:]) for /ar/ is a blend of Irish vowel quality and Southern English
non-rhotacism. Now that we see "local speech color" disappear in North
America (in large part due to migration and the influences of the electronic
media), rhotacism is in the process of encroaching even upon previously
proudly "different" dialect areas (having conquered most of New York City by
now). I predict that the next and final step will be the loss of different
vowel realizations, and this in a matter of one or two more generations. In
other words, I believe that the phenomenon of [aːɻ] ~ [æːɻ] ([a:r\`] ~
[&:r\`]) in Massachusetts English is a transitional one.

I would be interested in hearing other people's views on this.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070218/1afb6c1a/attachment.htm>