Re: accents


Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> Iain wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> Standard English spelling was designed for a
pronunciation
> > > > > > > > >> profoundly different from that of any modern English
> > > > > > > > >> variety;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ah yes, that mid-Atlantic, Cornish-Cockney, shwaless
sound?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Don't be ridiculous. Modern spelling most nearly
represents
> > > > > > > > late Middle English pronunciation.
('Cornish-Cockney'?!
> > > > > > > > WTF is that supposed to mean?)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wasn't it Iain who showed up recently with the claim that
English
> > > > > > > doesn't have any shwas?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shwas feature in speech but they aren't part of the
code(language) as
> > > > > > such -- A Scot says a shwa where someone else doesn't, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > We'd appreciate seeing your phonemic analysis of English that
manages to
> > > > > do without shwa.
> > > >
> > > > Well of course shwa features as a sound in English -- that's
obvious --
> > > > but not uniformly placed like other vowels tend to be, which
sets it
> > > > apart.
> > >
> > > We have no idea what you're saying.
> > >
> > > > I'll clarify. In a pronunciation dictionary, "get" only has one
> > > > pronunciation. However, the vowel sound in "get" sounds
different
> > > > worldwide but everyone says it the same way they do in "pet",
which is
> > > > why it only deserves one pronunciation in the dictionary. The
> > > > dictionary is basically saying "just say pet so that it rhymes
with
> > > > get, however you say it".
> > >
> > > Correct.
> > >
> > > > But "girl" and "curl" don't rhyme when I say them. "world" and
> > > > "twirled" don't rhyme when I say them.
> > >
> > > All four have the same vowel (which isn't a shwa);
> >
> > Have they a vowel in North America at all? There it begins like the
> > "gr" of "grill" and ends in a dark L.
>
> No, in NAmE it does not begin with /gr/.
>
> > > "girled" and "curled"
> > > are perfect rhymes with each other and with "world" and
"twirled."
> > > If they don't rhyme for you (and you're Scottish, so presumably
you're
> > > rhotic), they have different syllabic nuclei from each other.
> >
> > If by the syllabic nuclei you mean the vowels as distinct from the
Rs,
> > yes. I say them rhotic as an American, but with a U and I like in
"cut"
> > and "piss", respectively -- "G-ih-rl", "Kuh-rl".
>
> The "Rs" are part of the syllabic nuclei. If I had meant vowels, I
would
> have said vowels. Your phonemicization of those words is presumably
> /girl/ and /kVrl/; neither of them seems like what the several
Scotsmen
> I have known would say.


Not all Scots speak the same. My accent is from Troon, with a lot of
Highland thrown in.

Highlands -- girl
Lowlands -- G@rl
England -- G@l.


> > > But what's
> > > that got to do with English having or not having (a phoneme)
shwa?
> >
> > See below.
> >
> > > > "Early" has no shwa for me. Even
> > >
> > > Nor for me. Which syllable are you referring to?
> >
> > Shwa is Ә, right?
>
> I see cap-O-acute followed by tilde, so I don't know what you typed
> there. The ASCII equivalent for the shwa symbol ("turned e") in the
> scheme usually used here is @.

I typed an upside-down "e", and see it now even in the quote text
above. Try using Ariel.

Most Old English characters appear to me on Usenet; I thought maybe
that would.


> > Dictionaries of mine show a shwa at the end of "finger", and the
same
> > sound at the start of "early". My ears don't challenge that when
> > listening to RP, but neither are they shwas for me.
>
> You are consulting dictionaries of RP, which to me are useless.

That relates to my point. So can we clarify? Dictionaries of RP are
usless why? Is one correct dictionary possible for most pronunciations?
If so, can it correspond with bits of spoken RP words? Is RP
inconsistant with other pronunciations?

Would you say there is a shwa sound in RP's "early"? (unlike other
accents)
Would you say there is a shwa sound in RP's "entrepreneur"? (you said
yes)
Why is one useless as an example of English pronunciation and the other
not? Is RP's girl therefore straying from Standard English? Why?
Because of the shwa? Because for that one word at least, shwa isn't
part of the language, right?


> > > > "Entrepreneur" has no shwa for me. "Policeman" _does_ have a
shwa for
> > >
> > > "Entrepreneur" has two shwas, in the middle syllables. What do
you have?
> >
> > Mine rhymes with "manure". Ohn-treh-preh-nyoorr, with subtly bigger
> > emphasis on the penultimate syllable than usual. Mine is a ***
> > Highland accent. But I do say shwa in "entrepreneurship".
> >
> > > > me, but if I'm asked to say the word slowly it'd come out as an
/A/.
> > >
> > > Seems to me if you had to say "policeman" _that_ slowly, it would
be
> > > [o].
> >
> > So the shwa dies. You're thinking of the Lowland "mon". I'd say
"Man".
>
> You pronounce "policeman" as "Manliceman"??


:-) No no -- I was talking about policem [@] n.
I just asked my brother to say it slowly and clearly and it came out as
"Ah".

Western Scots say "police" so that it rhymes with "kiss" and starts
like "pole"; "policeman" has a final shwa vowel.



> If you won't use phonetic (at least) transcriptions, we have no idea
> what you're referring to.
>
> > All I'm really saying is that shwa is different from other sounds
in
> > English because it tends to disappear with emphasis, unlike "wet",
> > which can bear massive emphasis without phonemic alteration.
>
> Shwas can't "disappear" with emphasis, since they are by definition
in
> unstressed syllables.

Right, so when the syllable is stressed, the shwa is no more! I said
"disappear with emphasis" -- i.e. It disappears because of emphasis.

Emphasis only has denotation in words such as "excuse", etc but shwa
has even less -- Shwa seems to have little or no denotation in language
that cannot be replaced by the un-neutralised vowel.

In other languages, the same sound is not always a neutralisation.

If a shwa is a neutralisation of something else, isn't the "else" in
some form part of the language instead of the shwa?


> Except in the phonemicization that takes [V] (as
> in "up") to be the stressed allophone of shwa.
> > > > Shwa isn't a propor stead like the middle of "get".
> > >
> > > Usually your typos are self-correcting, but I don't know what
<propor
> > > stead> was meant to be.
> >
> > There is a parallel associated with E along which "get" and "wet"
rhyme
> > in various locations worldwide, but a parallel involving shwa
doesn't
> > stretch as far as where I am sitting.
> >
> > That's what I mean by "stead". Shwa is not steady. It can crop up
> > anywhere, and when it goes, the original vowel returns, hence the
/a/
> > in policeman.
>
> So in Scots, "stead" is a noun relating to "steady"? The only use of
it
> I know is something occurring "in something else's stead," i.e. as in
> "instead."
>
> > I just suspect that people pick up emphases from eachother rather
than
> > shwas themselves, and that shwas are an emergent result of the
> > emphases.
>
> ??
>
> > It seems more etheral, more an aspect of speech rather than
language
> > per se.
>
> ?? If, I say again, you produce a phonemic analysis of English that
> manages to do without shwa, I will be able to see what you are
saying.



Shwa's status as a phoneme: Isn't varying amounts of neutralisation a
facet of accent? If shwa is a neutralised vowel, doesn't it belong in
the ethereal realm of accent rather than pronunciation dictionaries for
multiple accents?



> > > Now, if you would provide your phonemic analysis of English
syllabic
> > > nuclei, with phonemic transcriptions of your examples ...?
> > >
> > > Or perhaps consult Wells's *Accents of English* and provide your
> > > interpretations of his 24 vowel sets? (Which include the full
range of
> > > r-containing ones for people like us who haven't been tainted by
the
> > > recent loss of r in a limited-range prestige dialect of English.)
> >
> > Have you a U.R.L.?
>
> I am not a website. I am a free man.

Ok.

~Iain

.

Quantcast