Ends with [ɪmzn̩] or [ɪmzən]--the sounds [n̩] and [ən] aren't very distinct for me, so I have trouble figuring out which is a better representation of my usual pronunciation. It feels at least like "crimson" is not quite as likely to have a phonetic vowel before the final [n] as a word ending in /ndən/ such as tendon or abandon.
That word has been noticed to have an irregular /ɔ/ [ɔ] among some Christian American speakers, even among those with the cot-caught merger (i.e. people who only have the /ɔ/-/ɑ/ contrast before /ɹ/ (born-barn) and maybe /n/ (dawn-Don)). (Maybe this why you're asking this question in the first place though...)
I personally pronounce God with /ɔ/ [ɒ] when I feel like making it especially clear that I am taking the Lord's name in vain or am being simply sarcastic.Ser wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:18 amThat word has been noticed to have an irregular /ɔ/ [ɔ] among some Christian American speakers, even among those with the cot-caught merger (i.e. people who only have the /ɔ/-/ɑ/ contrast before /ɹ/ (born-barn) and maybe /n/ (dawn-Don)). (Maybe this why you're asking this question in the first place though...
/gɒd/, which is particularly notable because my CLOTH vowel (General American /ɔ/) is normally /ɑ/. (I live in Michigan and have most of the Northern Cities Vowel Shift--my LOT is /a/)
/rezəluwtlɨj/ [rɛzɫ̩ʉwˀtɫi]
Do you have penult stress?
Yes, this is an Australian accent; the /ᵊ/ represents a syllabic consonant which often surfaces as a preceding short [ə̆]. I'm really not sure how to analyse it; in Australian English, sort of schwa-offglides or syllabic consonants occur after vowels as well (possibly phonemically) and I really can't tell whether or not they're separate syllables. Interpreting it as [ə] or syllabicism is fine. The reason there's [ɫ] in "resolutely" is because it's following a schwa. The velarisation/darkness isn't as strong as it is in the coda, but it is definitely darker than "logarithm." I probably should have been consistent and used [ᵊ] ([ˌɻʷe̞zᵊˈɫʉˑt’ ̚lɪi̯]).Estav wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:22 pm Thanks for the replies! I have a few followup questions. I probably should have included "resolute" also in the initial post; if any of you want to add a transcription for it, please mark the stress so I can see if it is different from the stress in the adverb. I was wondering whether anyone would have /ɑ/ in Iranian, which I have heard, but everyone so far has FACE (which I also use there).
- Is this an Australian accent?
- What does ᵊ represent? I'm familiar with it as a dictionary symbol used by J.C. Wells as shorthand to mark positions where a vocalic schwa phone is possible, but not always present. I'm not familiar with its meaning as an official IPA symbol: I found a Wikipedia article that says it "is used to modify the preceding consonant to have a mid central vowel release", but there's no citation. Should I interpret it here as an extra-short schwa (equivalent to [ə̆])?
- What is the pattern to the distribution of dark [ɫ] and clear [l] in your accent? I'm a bit surprised to see dark ɫ in onset of the stressed syllable in resolutely, but not in the onset of the first syllable of logarithm.
Interesting, I hadn't even thought about the schwa before the /l/ in "resolutely". I don't think post-schwa l is darkened before a stressed syllable in my accent (although my light and dark l are not very distinct, so it's not too easy to tell). So would you have a definite distinction between [ˈnɔʉ̟̯blɪi̯] with light l and [ˈglɔʉ̟̯bᵊɫɪi̯] with dark l at the end?Darren wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:33 pm The reason there's [ɫ] in "resolutely" is because it's following a schwa. The velarisation/darkness isn't as strong as it is in the coda, but it is definitely darker than "logarithm." I probably should have been consistent and used [ᵊ] ([ˌɻʷe̞zᵊˈɫʉˑt’ ̚lɪi̯]).
Yes, the distinction is more than just the schwa.Estav wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:34 pmInteresting, I hadn't even thought about the schwa before the /l/ in "resolutely". I don't think post-schwa l is darkened before a stressed syllable in my accent (although my light and dark l are not very distinct, so it's not too easy to tell). So would you have a definite distinction between [ˈnɔʉ̟̯blɪi̯] with light l and [ˈglɔʉ̟̯bᵊɫɪi̯] with dark l at the end?Darren wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:33 pm The reason there's [ɫ] in "resolutely" is because it's following a schwa. The velarisation/darkness isn't as strong as it is in the coda, but it is definitely darker than "logarithm." I probably should have been consistent and used [ᵊ] ([ˌɻʷe̞zᵊˈɫʉˑt’ ̚lɪi̯]).
I have an Australian accent as well (although people often tell me I sound South African), and I was surprised to see how close my pronunciation of these words was to Darren’s. Here’s my pronunciation of these words (plus resolute):
/ˌrezəˈluwtlɨj/
Two things immediately stand out (not necessarily as wrong, just unusual). Most English dialects don't aspirate word-final /t/, especially if it's glottalised. Also, the [t͡ɬ] thing is unusual, although it makes sense. I don't think I've ever seen it in a description of an English dialect.bradrn wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:05 pmI have an Australian accent as well (although people often tell me I sound South African), and I was surprised to see how close my pronunciation of these words was to Darren’s. Here’s my pronunciation of these words (plus resolute):
[ˈɻʷe̞zəˌɫʉːʔtʰ]~[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔtʰ] (both stress patterns seem to occur)
[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔt͡ɬiː]
[ˈɫɔgəˌɻʷɪðə̆m̩]
[ɪˈɻʷɑːn]
[ɪˈɻʷɑːniˌjən] (previously with [-æ͡i-], but I started to use [-ɑ-] a couple of months ago after I heard that pronunciation and realised it made much more sense)
[ˈnɞ̟͡ʉbliˑ]
[ˈse̞d̚tʰə̆ɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f]~[ˈse̞d̚tʰəhɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f] (that semivowel in the last syllable is unspecified for rounding and so is in free variation between ɰ~w)
(Note: this is one of the first times I’ve tried to phonetically transcribe my own speech, so there could be some small inaccuracies in the above transcriptions)
Yeah, I suppose those are pretty unusual, although I’ve never really thought of those phonetic details that way. One other unusual thing I forgot: my ‘aspiration’ for /t/ is actually mostly affrication, so resolute and said to himself should really be [ˈɻʷe̞zəˌɫʉːʔtˢʰ]~[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔtˢʰ] and [ˈse̞d̚tˢə̆ɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f]~[ˈse̞d̚tˢəhɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f].Darren wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:20 amTwo things immediately stand out (not necessarily as wrong, just unusual). Most English dialects don't aspirate word-final /t/, especially if it's glottalised. Also, the [t͡ɬ] thing is unusual, although it makes sense. I don't think I've ever seen it in a description of an English dialect.bradrn wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:05 pmI have an Australian accent as well (although people often tell me I sound South African), and I was surprised to see how close my pronunciation of these words was to Darren’s. Here’s my pronunciation of these words (plus resolute):
[ˈɻʷe̞zəˌɫʉːʔtʰ]~[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔtʰ] (both stress patterns seem to occur)
[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔt͡ɬiː]
[ˈɫɔgəˌɻʷɪðə̆m̩]
[ɪˈɻʷɑːn]
[ɪˈɻʷɑːniˌjən] (previously with [-æ͡i-], but I started to use [-ɑ-] a couple of months ago after I heard that pronunciation and realised it made much more sense)
[ˈnɞ̟͡ʉbliˑ]
[ˈse̞d̚tʰə̆ɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f]~[ˈse̞d̚tʰəhɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f] (that semivowel in the last syllable is unspecified for rounding and so is in free variation between ɰ~w)
(Note: this is one of the first times I’ve tried to phonetically transcribe my own speech, so there could be some small inaccuracies in the above transcriptions)
Also,
resolute [ˌɻʷe̞zᵊˈɫʉˑt’ ̚], although [ˈɻʷe̞zᵊˌɫʉˑt’ ̚] sounds pretty normal as well.
Ah, that makes more sense.bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:35 am Yeah, I suppose those are pretty unusual. One other unusual thing I forgot: my ‘aspiration’ for /t/ is actually mostly affrication, so resolute and said to himself should really be [ˈɻʷe̞zəˌɫʉːʔtˢʰ]~[ˌɻʷe̞zəˈɫʉːʔtˢʰ] and [ˈse̞d̚tˢə̆ɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f]~[ˈse̞d̚tˢəhɪmˌse̞(ɰ~w)f].
