Zompist Bboard Again

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:19 am I've noticed that there exist at least in English a number of phonemically strange words, that are hard to analyze using conventional English phonology. Take geminates, for instance - geminates within the vast majority of morphemes have been lost altogether centuries ago, with most of the remaining geminates being due to clusters split by morpheme boundaries, or in present-day dialects, are due to cluster assimilation and reduction, such as vo[kː]a. However, there are few words where there exist geminates that are not easy to analyze in either of these ways. Most are numbers, such as thir[tː]een, four[tː]een, seven[tː]een, and nine[tː]een. However, at least in the dialect here, of all words (I've mentioned this one before), there is pi[tːs]a, as if the word were borrowed directly from some Italian language with the geminate intact. There are also other occasional words in the English dialect here which are phonemically strange, such as t[ʌːʁˤ]get, which implies a separate /ʌr/ which is not a mere allophone of /ɑr/ despite the fact that this only exists before a lenis obstruent in a single word. This is excluding interjections and ononatopoeia, which have a general tendency to be phonologically odd crosslinguistically.

So, does anyone else also have similarly phonologically odd words in other lects?

thethief3 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 1:02 am "Pizza" could be analysed as a cluster of t and s as the affricate ts is not a phoneme in english through my pronounciation does leave room for doubt.

thethief3 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 1:02 am
The teen forms probably come form association with their plain forms through i don't know about "nineteen" through i don't have it.
"Ewe" is i imagine a spelling pronounciation.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 11:19 am I've noticed that there exist at least in English a number of phonemically strange words, that are hard to analyze using conventional English phonology. Take geminates, for instance - geminates within the vast majority of morphemes have been lost altogether centuries ago, with most of the remaining geminates being due to clusters split by morpheme boundaries, or in present-day dialects, are due to cluster assimilation and reduction, such as vo[kː]a. However, there are few words where there exist geminates that are not easy to analyze in either of these ways. Most are numbers, such as thir[tː]een, four[tː]een, seven[tː]een, and nine[tː]een. However, at least in the dialect here, of all words (I've mentioned this one before), there is pi[tːs]a, as if the word were borrowed directly from some Italian language with the geminate intact. There are also other occasional words in the English dialect here which are phonemically strange, such as t[ʌːʁˤ]get, which implies a separate /ʌr/ which is not a mere allophone of /ɑr/ despite the fact that this only exists before a lenis obstruent in a single word. This is excluding interjections and ononatopoeia, which have a general tendency to be phonologically odd crosslinguistically.

So, does anyone else also have similarly phonologically odd words in other lects?

Estav wrote: ↑Thu Mar 31, 2022 10:09 pm I don't perceive -teen numbers as having geminates in my dialect. There's a /t/ with the preceding rime clipped in thirteen, fourteen, nineteen, but this seems comparable to the occurrence of clipped /æ/ in tattoo, /eɪ/ in latex, or /aɪ/ (Canadian raising is non-phonemic for me) in high school.

That target example sounds similar to examples I've seen mentioned of exceptions to Candian raising distribution rules, like [əɪ] in spider and cider. I think I remember a post on the old forums (by Nortaneous, maybe?) saying that this often occurs in disyllabic bases where the second syllable contains /ə/. I'm curious, does [ʌːʁˤ] also feel possible for you in any of these words where -ar- is followed by a liquid: harness, varnish, tarnish, harmony? I feel like I have a length difference between harness and farness.

I'm not sure whether this is odd or not, but it feels natural to me to pronounce the plural of emeritus [ɘˈmeɚɘɾɘs] as [ɘˈmeɚɘɾaɪ], with a voiced flap (as in the singular) followed by [aɪ]. It seems like dictionaries usually show a secondary stress on the last syllable, which would imply to me [ɘˈmeɚɘtaɪ] with voiceless [t] instead.

axolotl wrote: ↑Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:02 pm Another such word is "color," which in my speech is the only word in which [ʌl] occurs.

All other potentially-/ʌl/ words are pronounced [ʊl], though a few have "uneven free variation" in which [ʌl] is also a possible (but much less likely) alternate pronunciation.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 10:39 am

axolotl wrote: ↑Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:02 pm Another such word is "color," which in my speech is the only word in which [ʌl] occurs.

All other potentially-/ʌl/ words are pronounced [ʊl], though a few have "uneven free variation" in which [ʌl] is also a possible (but much less likely) alternate pronunciation.

I have /ʌl/ in color, cruller, hull, and I personally have it in bulk but that may be a spelling pronunciation because I have heard other people here who have /ɔl/ in bulk.

axolotl wrote: ↑Thu Apr 07, 2022 2:39 am

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 10:39 am

axolotl wrote: ↑Thu Mar 31, 2022 11:02 pm Another such word is "color," which in my speech is the only word in which [ʌl] occurs.

All other potentially-/ʌl/ words are pronounced [ʊl], though a few have "uneven free variation" in which [ʌl] is also a possible (but much less likely) alternate pronunciation.

I have /ʌl/ in color, cruller, hull, and I personally have it in bulk but that may be a spelling pronunciation because I have heard other people here who have /ɔl/ in bulk.

Where are you from? The ʌl/ʊl -> ɔl thing before consonants and wordfinally is a well-established thing in American English, but I've never been able to find any clear geography of it, other than "vaguely Southern Midwest." I lived in Kansas City for a long time and noticed that it seemed to be a *very* common feature there in particular.