English questions

[vlad]

When people speak of "diphthongization of high long vowels" I always had thought of them as [ɪj] and [ʊw], i.e. only lightly diphthongized. (I only diphthongize mine when I have /uː/ after a coronal/palatal and before a dorsal, as [yu].)

There's register-related alternation; careful [ɪi̯ ʊʉ̯] ranging to casual [əi̯ əy̯]. In unstressed syllables (happY) you might find [ɪi̯] or perhaps even [i], but always [əj] before a vowel ([ˌhæpʰəjɜzˈɫʷæɻɪi̯]). "to" and "gonna" both end in [ɜ] in normal unstressed position, but [əw] (or ?[əɻʷ]) before a vowel; likewise "the" is [ðɜ], [ðəj] (but never *[ðɜɻʷ]).

My FLEECE and GOOSE vowels are pretty centralized, but not all the way to schwa. FLEECE has spread lips and GOOSE has rounded lips. And happY is consistently [ɪj] (or maybe [ij]?), even before vowels.

FOOT [ʊ] vs. NORTH/THOUGHT/FORCE/CURE [ʊː]

You really have [ʊː] for NORTH/THOUGHT/FORCE? For me, full [fʊl] and fool [fʊːl] are a minimal pair for vowel length, in contrast to fall [foːl]. Do you merge fool and fall? (Though now that I think of it, some people have the LOT vowel in fall, so maybe that's how they're distinguished.)

[Travis B.]

I think I had thought AusE was more normal than it actually is... I had really thought it was relatively close to SSBE aside from having a somewhat closer THOUGHT/NORTH/FORCE/CURE, a more open STRUT and a central START/PALM/BATH that only contrasted in quantity, and a quantity contrast between LAD and BAD.

[Darren]

You really have [ʊː] for NORTH/THOUGHT/FORCE? For me, full [fʊl] and fool [fʊːl] are a minimal pair for vowel length, in contrast to fall [foːl]. Do you merge fool and fall? (Though now that I think of it, some people have the LOT vowel in fall, so maybe that's how they're distinguished.)

Yes, "fool" and "fall" are merged as [fʊːɫʷ]. Likewise "doll" and "dole" are both [dɔu̯ɫʷ]. On the other hand, "Hal" and "hell" are distinct [ˈhæɫʷ] vs. [ˈheɫʷ], when they're merged by people in M[æ]lbourne.

[Travis B.]

Yes, "fool" and "fall" are merged as [fʊːɫʷ]. Likewise "doll" and "dole" are both [dɔu̯ɫʷ].

Wow. Here no vowels are merged as a result of l-vocalization, and even /oʊ/ [o̞]~[ɵ̞] and /oʊl/ [o̞ʊ̯] (always back even after coronals) are kept apart (even when an offglide is added to /oʊ/ word-finally or before another vowel, it is [w] and is fully rounded, whereas the offglide from /l/ is not as strongly rounded and is more open).

[Travis B.]

Does anyone else have a contrast between what can be best described as /ar/ and /ɑr/ from historical /ɔːlr/ and /ɒr/ respectively in their dialects? In conservative pronunciation my dialect /ɔːlr/ is [ɒo̯ʁˤ], and in less conservative but still conservative-ish pronunciation such as my own for this it is [ɒʁˤ]. However, many people here have [aʁˤ] which contrasts with [ɑʁˤ] from /ɒr/ (e.g. all right [aːˈʁˤə̆ĕ̯ʔ(t)] and already [aːˈʁˤɜːɾi(ː)]~[aːˈʁˤɜːːj] versus tomorrow [tʰə̃ːˈmɑːʁo̞(ː)(w)]~[ɾə̃ːˈmɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)] and sorrow [ˈsɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)]), even though people sometimes shift /ɔːlr/ in the opposite direction to [ɔʁˤ].

[zompist]

Does anyone else have a contrast between what can be best described as /ar/ and /ɑr/ from historical /ɔːlr/ and /ɒr/ respectively in their dialects? In conservative pronunciation my dialect /ɔːlr/ is [ɒo̯ʁˤ], and in less conservative but still conservative-ish pronunciation such as my own for this it is [ɒʁˤ]. However, many people here have [aʁˤ] which contrasts with [ɑʁˤ] from /ɒr/ (e.g. all right [aːˈʁˤə̆ĕ̯ʔ(t)] and already [aːˈʁˤɜːɾi(ː)]~[aːˈʁˤɜːːj] versus tomorrow [tʰə̃ːˈmɑːʁo̞(ː)(w)]~[ɾə̃ːˈmɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)] and sorrow [ˈsɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)]), even though people sometimes shift /ɔːlr/ in the opposite direction to [ɔʁˤ].

If I'm following, you're saying that the already/tomorrow contrast becomes one of backing alone in Milwaukee, while the standard involves rounding, and backing in the opposite direction— /ɔl/ vs. /a/.

FWIW I have /ɔ/ vs. /a/.

[Travis B.]

Does anyone else have a contrast between what can be best described as /ar/ and /ɑr/ from historical /ɔːlr/ and /ɒr/ respectively in their dialects? In conservative pronunciation my dialect /ɔːlr/ is [ɒo̯ʁˤ], and in less conservative but still conservative-ish pronunciation such as my own for this it is [ɒʁˤ]. However, many people here have [aʁˤ] which contrasts with [ɑʁˤ] from /ɒr/ (e.g. all right [aːˈʁˤə̆ĕ̯ʔ(t)] and already [aːˈʁˤɜːɾi(ː)]~[aːˈʁˤɜːːj] versus tomorrow [tʰə̃ːˈmɑːʁo̞(ː)(w)]~[ɾə̃ːˈmɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)] and sorrow [ˈsɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)]), even though people sometimes shift /ɔːlr/ in the opposite direction to [ɔʁˤ].

If I'm following, you're saying that the already/tomorrow contrast becomes one of backing alone in Milwaukee, while the standard involves rounding, and backing in the opposite direction— /ɔl/ vs. /a/.

FWIW I have /ɔ/ vs. /a/.

It's very counterintuitive. I personally have [ɒ] versus [ɑ] most of the time in these words. What I am thinking is that the /l/ protects the THOUGHT from the backing influence of the /r/ as seen with LOT before it, and it irregularly becomes [a] for reasons I have not gathered in many people's speech here. (Incidentally, these are the only cases I am aware of of THOUGHT becoming [a] in the dialect here aside from an irregular change of okay which undergoes GOAT [o̞] > THOUGHT [ɒ] > LOT [a] at times.)

[Darren]

Does anyone else have a contrast between what can be best described as /ar/ and /ɑr/ from historical /ɔːlr/ and /ɒr/ respectively in their dialects? In conservative pronunciation my dialect /ɔːlr/ is [ɒo̯ʁˤ], and in less conservative but still conservative-ish pronunciation such as my own for this it is [ɒʁˤ]. However, many people here have [aʁˤ] which contrasts with [ɑʁˤ] from /ɒr/ (e.g. all right [aːˈʁˤə̆ĕ̯ʔ(t)] and already [aːˈʁˤɜːɾi(ː)]~[aːˈʁˤɜːːj] versus tomorrow [tʰə̃ːˈmɑːʁo̞(ː)(w)]~[ɾə̃ːˈmɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)] and sorrow [ˈsɑːʁˤo̞(ː)(w)]), even though people sometimes shift /ɔːlr/ in the opposite direction to [ɔʁˤ].

That is, all of it, heinous.

Incidentally, I have [ʊːˈɻʷɑe̯ʔ(t)] vs. [tˢɜˈmäɻʷɜy̯]