Zompist Bboard Again

Trisyllabic, something like [ai'dɪi.jə].

Non-native speaker, but bisyllabic, I think, with a diphthong. I'm also wondering whether many of you claiming to have three syllables don't have a falling diphthong in the second and last one.


JAL

Something like [əi̯.ˈdiː.ə], I think.

What about "either" and "aether"?

Roughly ['iːj.ðəɹ~'aːi.ðəɹ] and [ij.θəɹ], respectively, a rare minimal pair between voiced and voiceless "th".

I have either [ˈiːðʁ̩ˤ(ː)] and ether [ˈiθʁ̩ˤ(ː)]. Whether it is a minimal pair for [ð] versus [θ] depends on whether considers vowel length to be phonemic or not in my lect (I can make what are on the surface minimal pairs based on vowel length alone (e.g. latter versus ladder, sorting versus soaring), but there is good reason to believe that these are really due to consonants in the underlying forms which are lost or neutralized in the surface forms).

I wouldn't be surprised if devoicing of voiced stops were to become very widespread in North American English (quite a few board members seem to have it, though I don't myself).

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:28 am I wouldn't be surprised if devoicing of voiced stops were to become very widespread in North American English (quite a few board members seem to have it, though I don't myself).

I have generalized final devoicing of lenis obstruents except when the following word begins with a sonorant (particularly a vowel), where then voicing may be optionally preserved. I have optional initial voicing of initial lenis plosives, which favors devoicing except when speaking carefully (particularly on the phone or Skype) or when the preceding word ends with a sonorant (particularly a vowel). I preserve full voicing of initial lenis fricatives, and notably final /z/ followed by /ð/ may assimilate together as [zː]. I do tend to preserve the voicing of single medial lenis obstruents, both intervocalic and between sonorants in general. However, I tend to devoice obstruent clusters, even medially, even when they contain no fortis obstruents.

One important note is that I strongly preserve (arguably historically) allophonic vowel length even despite all this devoicing, except in a few isolated words such as have to and has to, where long vowels have been shortened. This combined with aspiration and preglottalization mean that practically no words merge despite this widespread devoicing.

Raholeun wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 3:45 am What about "either" and "aether"?

/ijðər/ ~ /ajðər/

/ijθər/

Imralu wrote: ↑Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:43 am [ɑe̯ˈdɪː] before a consonant
[ɑe̯ˈdɪːɹ] before a vowel
[ɑe̯ˈdɪɐ̯] pre-pausa

For me, it's:

[ɑe̯ˈdɪː] before a consonant or a pause
[ɑe̯ˈdɪːɹ] before a vowel

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 5:52 pm [ɑ͡iˈdi.ɐ] — the last two syllables are homophonous with dear [ˈdi.ɐ]

Your dear is bisyllabic? Do the other schwa diphthongs also become bisyllabic?

vlad wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:11 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 5:52 pm [ɑ͡iˈdi.ɐ] — the last two syllables are homophonous with dear [ˈdi.ɐ]

Your dear is bisyllabic? Do the other schwa diphthongs also become bisyllabic?

Yes to both.

Does anyone else have a phonemic contrast between lyre and liar and between mire and Meyer? (Note that hire versus higher also shows this contrast, but it also involves a morpheme boundary; of course, one can argue the same for lyre versus liar.) (Note that this contrast for me can be analyzed two different ways, one involving /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/ and the other involving /əɪər/ versus /aɪər/; the first assumes that [ae̯] and [əe̯] are allophones, even though that can be questioned, the second overlooks morphological alternations between [əːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] and [əːe̯ʁˤ] which occur when extra morphemes starting with vowels are added to the words in question (e.g. fire [ˈfəːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] versus firing [ˈfəːe̯ʁˤɘ̃(ː)ŋ]).

I hadn't ever heard of such a contrast. To me, "lyre" and "liar" are both ['laɪ.jəɹ], "mire" is ['maɪ.jəɹ], and "Meyer" may also be ['maɪ.jəɹ], though I've encountered people who pronounce it ['meɪ.jəɹ] (I use whatever pronunciation the person whose name it is uses if I know it, but ['maɪ.jəɹ] is my default); "higher" and "hire" are also homophones for me, [haɪ.jəɹ]. My /ai/ is also [aɪ] or [aj] (as a standalone word, "I" sounds like [aːj], but the second element is more vowel-y in disyllables where there's a [j] ejected to fill the hiatus), not [ae] or [əe], though those probably sound a little nicer ([aɪ] is not my favourite diphthong).

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:16 am I hadn't ever heard of such a contrast.

I have, but I'm the sort of person who merges "mirror" and "mere", so don't look to me for a robust set of rhotic contrasts.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:20 am

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:16 am I hadn't ever heard of such a contrast.

I have, but I'm the sort of person who merges "mirror" and "mere", so don't look to me for a robust set of rhotic contrasts.

I could see [miːɹəɹ] and [miː(ə)ɹ~miəɹ] becoming homophones; all you have to do is dump out a schwa and you're more-or-less there. As far as North American varieties go, I have an idea that my idiolect is very conservative, except it has the Mary-merry-marry merger, along with the more ubiquitous wine-whine and cot-caught mergers, and sometimes the I'll-all merger, but I'll is still a homophone of isle and aisle when emphasised.

I also tend to slightly diphthongise [æ] to something like [æə̯̆] in closed syllables before voiceless consonants and [ɫ] (which tends to eject a schwa before it anyway no matter what comes before). That tiny schwa also feels a bit like a glottal stop, so "bath" is something like [bæə̯̆θ] or [bæʔθ]. I don't have it fully broken to anything like [eə], which is not regionally uncommon. Does anybody else do this?

Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:08 am Does anyone else have a phonemic contrast between lyre and liar and between mire and Meyer?

If I manage to slip into a register where /aɪə/ monophongises to somethinɡ like [aː] or [æː], then I think the second doesn't monophthonɡise. I'm not confident that lyre is in the associated lexicon, and Meyer definitely isn't. The contrasting pair would be tire and the agent noun tier (as opposed to rime tier of dear). I abandoned that phonetic system about half a century ago. It seems not to be well-noted - fire did not rime with ma or power.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:20 am

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:16 am I hadn't ever heard of such a contrast.

I have, but I'm the sort of person who merges "mirror" and "mere", so don't look to me for a robust set of rhotic contrasts.

I have the mirror-mere merger, but only for that word-pair.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:08 am Does anyone else have a phonemic contrast between lyre and liar and between mire and Meyer? (Note that hire versus higher also shows this contrast, but it also involves a morpheme boundary; of course, one can argue the same for lyre versus liar.) (Note that this contrast for me can be analyzed two different ways, one involving /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/ and the other involving /əɪər/ versus /aɪər/; the first assumes that [ae̯] and [əe̯] are allophones, even though that can be questioned, the second overlooks morphological alternations between [əːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] and [əːe̯ʁˤ] which occur when extra morphemes starting with vowels are added to the words in question (e.g. fire [ˈfəːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] versus firing [ˈfəːe̯ʁˤɘ̃(ː)ŋ]).

Yes. My perception is that lyre, hire and mire are each one syllable and liar, higher and Meyer are two. If I analyse my accent as rhotic at the phonological level (which I think is the right analysis) then that'd be /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/.

anteallach wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:20 am

Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:08 am Does anyone else have a phonemic contrast between lyre and liar and between mire and Meyer? (Note that hire versus higher also shows this contrast, but it also involves a morpheme boundary; of course, one can argue the same for lyre versus liar.) (Note that this contrast for me can be analyzed two different ways, one involving /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/ and the other involving /əɪər/ versus /aɪər/; the first assumes that [ae̯] and [əe̯] are allophones, even though that can be questioned, the second overlooks morphological alternations between [əːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] and [əːe̯ʁˤ] which occur when extra morphemes starting with vowels are added to the words in question (e.g. fire [ˈfəːe̯ʁ̩ˤ(ː)] versus firing [ˈfəːe̯ʁˤɘ̃(ː)ŋ]).

Yes. My perception is that lyre, hire and mire are each one syllable and liar, higher and Meyer are two. If I analyse my accent as rhotic at the phonological level (which I think is the right analysis) then that'd be /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/.

From paying a bit more attention, it seems to me that for me the [ʁ̩ˤ] in lyre, hire, and mire is shorter than that in liar, higher, and Meyer, which points more at a /aɪr/ versus /aɪər/ analysis.

Interesting convo today about a special subclass of "spelling pronunciations", specifically the ones you never speak aloud but only subvocalise in order to remember the proper spelling of a word. For instance, saying "Wednesday" in three syllables or pronouncing "parliament" as /ˈparlɪəmənt/. What ones do you have?