English questions

[Travis B.]

At least in American English, one can listen for the differences between the vowels. /t/ will have a short vowel with a sharply rising tone precede it, and /d/ will have a long vowel with a gently falling tone precede it.

Also, /t/ when not preceded by a fricative is commonly glottalized, and the preceding nasal if not syllabic will be elided leaving the preceding vowel nasalized, whereas /d/ will not be glottalized and the preceding nasal will be preserved as-is.

I agree that /t/ is commonly glottalized at the end of a word, but I think that /d/ is also, at least in my dialect.

In my dialect all coda fortis plosives not preceded by a fricative are (pre)glottalized and result in a rising tone in the preceding vowel. Note that this is a good test for whether a fortis plosive falls in a coda or not, and results in some possibly-unexpected conclusions (e.g. the /p/ in topsy(-turvy), the /t/ in Nazi, and the /k/ in boxy are not coda plosives because they are not (pre)glottalized and do not trigger rising tone in the preceding vowel).

What's hard to tell apart are word-final /n/ and /nd/. One can listen for the sandhi if the next word starts with a vowel, but otherwise it can be very hard.

There are quite a few word-final consonant clusters that get readily reduced in many NAE varieties (including my own), especially if not followed by a vowel in the next word, including /nd/, /st/, /ld/, /ft/, /kt/, /sk/, /skt/, and so on.

[quinterbeck]

How would you usually refer to the Tuesday before Lent starts¹?

Shrove Tuesday, or more commonly, Pancake Day!!!!! I flipping love pancake day.

Edit: I realise this was already discussed but I get inordinately excited about pancake day for some reason.

[Lērisama]

Edit: I realise this was already discussed but I get inordinately excited about pancake day for some reason.

Presumably because pancakes?

[/ˌnɐ.ˈɾɛn.dɚ.ˌduːd/]

Edit: I realise this was already discussed but I get inordinately excited about pancake day for some reason.

Presumably because pancakes?

who doesn't love pancakes?

[quinterbeck]

Edit: I realise this was already discussed but I get inordinately excited about pancake day for some reason.

Presumably because pancakes?

Probably. In our household we forego a proper meal and just eat pancakes with sweet things on them, which feels like a big treat.

[Raphael]

How did that pancakes-on-Shrove-Tuesday thing start?

[Lērisama]

How did that pancakes-on-Shrove-Tuesday thing start?

Using up nice things before Lent starts and you're not allowed them.

[jal]

How did that pancakes-on-Shrove-Tuesday thing start?

You're asking how a tradition dating back to medieval times came to be?


JAL

[Raphael]

How did that pancakes-on-Shrove-Tuesday thing start?

You're asking how a tradition dating back to medieval times came to be?


JAL

Yes, because it's not, as far as I've heard, a tradition in other places where Lent is a thing.

[jal]

Yes, because it's not, as far as I've heard, a tradition in other places where Lent is a thing.

Sure, but these traditions go back so far in time, that it's impossible to say how they started. And that goes for all the other (pre-)Lent traditions in other countries as well.


JAL

[Travis B.]

How did that pancakes-on-Shrove-Tuesday thing start?

You're asking how a tradition dating back to medieval times came to be?


JAL

Yes, because it's not, as far as I've heard, a tradition in other places where Lent is a thing.

It is essentially the same premise as that behind pączki.

[Travis B.]

My dialect of English is partially h-dropping, and I've noticed that when /h/ is dropped at the start of an utterance, it does not merge with lack of a consonant in this position ─ rather, lack of a consonant is marked by a glottal stop, and the former /h/ is marked by, well, nothing at all ─ rather, the following vowel just starts without any audible release. What is going on here? Allegedly, all utterance-initial vowel phonemes are preceded by phonetic glottal stops, yet that precisely does not apply here. Or is the [h] really still subtly there but is being modified in a way I am not quite catching (e.g. is this some kind of breathy-voicing thing)?

[bradrn]

Allegedly, all utterance-initial vowel phonemes are preceded by phonetic glottal stops

Not at all. It’s perfectly possible for the vocal cords to begin vibrating without them having been held closed beforehand.

[Travis B.]

Allegedly, all utterance-initial vowel phonemes are preceded by phonetic glottal stops

Not at all. It’s perfectly possible for the vocal cords to begin vibrating without them having been held closed beforehand.

I stand corrected.

One thing I notice is that when I try to start a vowel-initial utterance without an initial glottal stop, it just feels to me like there is an /h/ at its start even if there is no devoicing going on.

[jal]

Not at all. It’s perfectly possible for the vocal cords to begin vibrating without them having been held closed beforehand.

Quite. Dutch has, in contrast with German, no glottal stop before a vowel.


JAL

[Travis B.]

Not at all. It’s perfectly possible for the vocal cords to begin vibrating without them having been held closed beforehand.

Quite. Dutch has, in contrast with German, no glottal stop before a vowel.

A key difference between the English here and German is that in German any word- or root-initial vowel receives a glottal stop (even word-internally as in words like Verein [fɐˈʔaɪ̯n]!) whereas in the English here it is only at the start of an utterance -- mid-utterance word-initial vowels do not normally receive glottal stops.

[jcb]

To be honest, I still find it difficult to distinguish between word-final d and word-final t.

At least in American English, one can listen for the differences between the vowels. /t/ will have a short vowel with a sharply rising tone precede it, and /d/ will have a long vowel with a gently falling tone precede it.

Interesting, good to know! So tonality is everywhere...

I took the time to make a chart of how I think the tones look:

However, I haven't done any audio analysis with tools, so this is just what I think it sounds like.

Also, note the difference in the lengths of the vowels, which is typical in American English, but absent from British English, from what I've been told.

[Travis B.]

At least in American English, one can listen for the differences between the vowels. /t/ will have a short vowel with a sharply rising tone precede it, and /d/ will have a long vowel with a gently falling tone precede it.

Interesting, good to know! So tonality is everywhere...

I took the time to make a chart of how I think the tones look:

However, I haven't done any audio analysis with tools, so this is just what I think it sounds like.

Also, note the difference in the lengths of the vowels, which is typical in American English, but absent from British English, from what I've been told.

From EngE speakers I have heard that they have clipping of vowels before fortis coda consonants, whereas in the dialect here the rule is that vowels are long unless there is an obstruent before the next vowel (or, in last syllable of an utterance, the end of the utterance) and the first obstruent following a vowel is fortis or there are no obstruents following a vowel in the last syllable in an utterance. Note, that in the dialect here this is on top of all other vowel length variation, e.g. both stressed and unstressed vowels may be long or short, but a short stressed vowel may be similar in length to a long unstressed vowel.

[jcb]

Interesting, good to know! So tonality is everywhere...

I took the time to make a chart of how I think the tones look:

However, I haven't done any audio analysis with tools, so this is just what I think it sounds like.

Also, note the difference in the lengths of the vowels, which is typical in American English, but absent from British English, from what I've been told.

From EngE speakers I have heard that they have clipping of vowels before fortis coda consonants, whereas in the dialect here the rule is that vowels are long unless there is an obstruent before the next vowel (or, in last syllable of an utterance, the end of the utterance) and the first obstruent following a vowel is fortis or there are no obstruents following a vowel in the last syllable in an utterance. Note, that in the dialect here this is on top of all other vowel length variation, e.g. both stressed and unstressed vowels may be long or short, but a short stressed vowel may be similar in length to a long unstressed vowel.

Thank you for clarifying about English English.

Regarding how stress and multiple syllables affect vowel length, I haven't studied how they interact in my dialect, so I can't say anything.

[Travis B.]

About the tones, in my idiolect at least rising tone only occurs before (pre)glottalized plosives, and thus does not occur intervocalically, before certain clusters between stressed and unstressed vowels such as /ps/ (as in topsy-turvy), /ts/ (as in Nazi), or /ks/ (as in boxy) (even though it does occur before /tts/ as in pizza), or before voiceless fricatives regardless of where they fall in a given syllable. I seem to have a difference between level tone and (lightly) falling tone, because ladder takes level tone while lad takes falling tone.