Whats up with this vowel?

[anal...@hotmail.com]

It can end a stressed monosyllable:

AW AWE CAW CHAW CLAW CRAW DAW DRAW FLAW GNAW JAW LAW MAW PAW SAW SLAW
STRAW THAW YAW

But allows the velar nasal to follow it.

Is there anything in English historical phonology that explains why it
is confused with respect to tense/lax?

[Christian Weisgerber]

anal...@hotmail.com <anal...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> It can end a stressed monosyllable:
>
> AW AWE CAW CHAW CLAW CRAW DAW DRAW FLAW GNAW JAW LAW MAW PAW SAW SLAW
> STRAW THAW YAW
>
> But allows the velar nasal to follow it.

Examples?

> Is there anything in English historical phonology that explains why it
> is confused with respect to tense/lax?

I think depending on the dialect your question is either counterfactual
or answered by the lot-cloth split.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[anal...@hotmail.com]

On Apr 27, 12:57 pm, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

> analys...@hotmail.com <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > It can end a stressed monosyllable:
>
> > AW AWE CAW CHAW CLAW CRAW DAW DRAW FLAW GNAW JAW LAW MAW PAW SAW  SLAW
> > STRAW THAW YAW
>
> > But allows the velar nasal to follow it.
>
> Examples?
>

Oxford Advanced American Dictionary


song
noun
/sɔŋ/ song pronunciation American


saw
noun
/sɔ/ saw pronunciation American

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 27, 12:57 pm, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

> analys...@hotmail.com <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > It can end a stressed monosyllable:
>
> > AW AWE CAW CHAW CLAW CRAW DAW DRAW FLAW GNAW JAW LAW MAW PAW SAW  SLAW
> > STRAW THAW YAW
>
> > But allows the velar nasal to follow it.
>
> Examples?
>
> > Is there anything in English historical phonology that explains why it
> > is confused with respect to tense/lax?
>
> I think depending on the dialect your question is either counterfactual
> or answered by the lot-cloth split.

Since she or he does not state the assumptions that leads her or him
to claim that something "is confused," there is no possible answer to
her or his question.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 27, 3:41 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> On Apr 27, 12:57 pm, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
> > analys...@hotmail.com <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > It can end a stressed monosyllable:
>
> > > AW AWE CAW CHAW CLAW CRAW DAW DRAW FLAW GNAW JAW LAW MAW PAW SAW  SLAW
> > > STRAW THAW YAW
>
> > > But allows the velar nasal to follow it.
>
> > Examples?
>
> Oxford Advanced American Dictionary
>
> song
> noun
> /sɔŋ/ song pronunciation American
>
> saw
> noun
> /sɔ/ saw pronunciation American

Yes, that's how those words are pronounced. What is your problem?

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Apr 27, 1:36 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Check Wikipedia's "Phonological history of English low back vowels",
especially (as Christian suggested) the section on the LOT-CLOTH split.

[Christian Weisgerber]

anal...@hotmail.com <anal...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Oxford Advanced American Dictionary
>
> /sɔŋ/ song pronunciation American
> /sɔ/ saw pronunciation American

/sɒŋ/ vs. /sɔː/ for BrE.

> > I think depending on the dialect your question is either counterfactual
> > or answered by the lot-cloth split.

What I said.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_English_low_back_vowels

[anal...@hotmail.com]

On Apr 27, 6:38 pm, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

> analys...@hotmail.com <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Oxford Advanced American Dictionary
>
> > /sɔŋ/ song pronunciation American
> > /sɔ/ saw pronunciation American
>
> /sɒŋ/ vs. /sɔː/ for BrE.
>
> > > I think depending on the dialect your question is either counterfactual
> > > or answered by the lot-cloth split.
>

> What I said.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_English_low_bac...

>
> --
> Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          na...@mips.inka.de

There are the pure open "father" vowel (the sound your doctor asks you
to make to look at your throat) , the pure rounded monophthongal o (as
reported in Sara Palin's speech) and the "how now brown cow" diphthong
that go back to Proto-Indo-European.

To my ears the In-between vowel(s) in lot,cloth,thought,dog,corn etc.
are all the same. Phonemically, these must have been a single vowel
in any dialect at any time - is that correct?

The question is - is this vowel tense or lax?

The velar nasal test proves conclusively that it is lax

ALONG
BELONG
CONGA
CONGER
DIPHTHONG
DONKEY(1)
ELONGATE
FURLONG
GONG
HONK(1)
HONKY
INCONGRUOUS
LONG
OBLONG
OOLONG
PINGPONG
PROLONG
PRONG
RECONQUER
SARONG
SONG
STRONG
THONG
THRONG
TONG
WRONG

Some sound change process must explain all the monosyllables ending
with this vowel (incidentally all spelled with <aw>) - they could not
have entered the language in their present form.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 29, 8:29 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

(a) What is "the velar nasal test"? You have /a/s, /O/s, and non-velar
nasals in that list.

(b) What does "could (not) have entered the language" mean? Do you
suppose that languages have gatekeepers?

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:29:54 PM UTC+12, anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 27, 6:38 pm, na...@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
>
> > analys...@hotmail.com <analys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Oxford Advanced American Dictionary
>
> >
>
> > > /sɔŋ/ song pronunciation American
>
> > > /sɔ/ saw pronunciation American
>
> >
>
> > /sɒŋ/ vs. /sɔː/ for BrE.
>
> >
>
> > > > I think depending on the dialect your question is either counterfactual
>
> > > > or answered by the lot-cloth split.
>
> >
>
> > What I said.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_English_low_bac...
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          na...@mips.inka.de
>
>
>
> There are the pure open "father" vowel (the sound your doctor asks you
>
> to make to look at your throat) , the pure rounded monophthongal o (as
>
> reported in Sara Palin's speech) and the "how now brown cow" diphthong
>
> that go back to Proto-Indo-European.
>

??? "go back to PIE" in what sense???
I'm guessing that in fact by "go back to PIE" you mean roughly "sound like Sanskrit".

>
>
> To my ears the In-between vowel(s) in lot,cloth,thought,dog,corn etc.
>
> are all the same. Phonemically, these must have been a single vowel
>
> in any dialect at any time - is that correct?

Suppose we substitute "some" for "any" (twice) in your question, to make it mean something.
Then the answer is "no".

Did you even read the Wiki article we directed you to? Or is this going to be more self-inflicted ignorance, hurling questions as if the world owed you an explanation?

[anal...@hotmail.com]

On Apr 29, 10:31 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:

> Did you even read the Wiki article we directed you to? Or is this going to be more self-inflicted ignorance, hurling questions as if the world owed you an explanation?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

verfied that all except "slaw" had a different vowel originally or a
consonant that got dropped etc. "slaw" is an exception although it
seldom appears separate from "cole".

Some thing like the "lot-cloth" split loses me - since I can't imagine
them unsplit. I can recognize the The New York - New Jersey "tense
short a" which sounds like an in-between vowel between "cat" and
"Kate" - but I have no way of imagining varieties of /ô/. In
particular two varieties phonetically distinct from each other and
distinct from each of "boat", "father" and "how,now,brown,cow".

At any rate - my main interest is the tense/lax status of /ô/. There
seems to be a difference of opinion about this but I have verified my
own view of the matter.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Apr 30, 8:55 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

LOT is _not_ distinct from FATHER. They're /a/.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On May 1, 12:55 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Why is that so hard? They're unsplit in RP, and NZ, and my native
dialect.

The "cloth" class is precisely words which have migrated from "lot" to
"thought" in AmE. In your terms, this is from lax to tense, and
therein lies the answer to your original question. The migrating words
include some like "long" and "song", so you now have a tense vowel
before /N/ -- something previously not possible, presumably because
of /N/'s origins as a consonant cluster.

I can recognize the The New York -  New Jersey "tense
> short a" which sounds like an in-between vowel between "cat" and
> "Kate" - but I have no way of imagining varieties of  /ô/.  In
> particular two varieties phonetically distinct from each other and
> distinct from each of "boat", "father" and "how,now,brown,cow".

I don't know what you mean by /ô/, but many varieties of English have
two vowels with the properties you describe -- e.g. RP /ɒ/ and /ɔ:/.
They're not part of my native English, but I didn't find it hard to
get used to hearing the distinction and reproducing them with
tolerable accuracy.

[anal...@hotmail.com]

> > own view of the matter.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

here are the vowels Fowler thinks are in English (1965 ed.):

mate,mete,mite,mote,mute,moot
rack,reck,rick,rock,ruck,rook
mare,mere,mire,more,mure
part,pert,port
bah,bowl,boil,boor,brow,bower

Which would be in the cloth,lot etc. set?

Any examples that I can hear at the Oxford Advanced Learner's
Dictionary?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 1, 9:59 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Why would a list of RP vowels be relevant to American English vowels?

LOT and "rock" and "part" and "bah" have the same vowel, and CLOTH and
"more" and "port" have the same vowel.

That is incomprehensible from the RP point of view because vowels
before /r/ are not identified with vowels not before /r/.

> Any examples that I can hear at the Oxford Advanced Learner's
> Dictionary?

Is it for Learners of American English?

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On May 2, 1:59 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

I assume you're talking about H.W.Fowler (1858-1933)? He would
therefore be describing what we call RP. "rock" is his representative
word for the vowel /ɒ/ that both CLOTH and LOT words have in RP.
"more" and "port" have the vowels of NORTH and FORCE, which for RP
speakers are the same as THOUGHT /ɔ:/.

> Any examples that I can hear at the Oxford Advanced Learner's
> Dictionary?

I'm sure you can hear plenty of /ɒ/ and /ɔ:/, as well as the other RP
vowels, but you probably won't hear what happens to them in AmEng.

[anal...@hotmail.com]

> vowels, but you probably won't hear what happens to them in AmEng.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/thought

Both the BrE and NAmE versions are trasncribed with

ɔː

But if they are considered to be the same sound - I am missing
something pretty basic here. (To my ears the BrE version is almost
monophthongal O and the AmE version = "father").

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 5, 12:45 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/thought
>
> Both the BrE and NAmE versions are trasncribed with
>
> ɔː
>
> But if they are considered to be the same sound - I am missing
> something pretty basic here.  (To my ears the BrE version is almost
> monophthongal O and the AmE version = "father").

_What_ are "both" transcribed the same?

Have you never heard of the cot/caught merge?

I don't know whether "cot" and "caught" are supposed to be homonyms in
BrE.

In AmE west of the Mississippi, pretty much, they have merged as "cot"
= FATHER.

Does that have anything to do with the LOT/CLOTH split?

If not, it's your typical red herring.

If it does, what's your problem?

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On May 6, 4:45 am, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>

The phonetic difference is clear, but phonetically different vowels
may nevertheless represent the "same" phoneme, i.e. a unit which
occupies an analogous position within the vowel system. Whether that's
the case here is unclear because of additional complications. OALD use
of /ɔː/ to represent both phonemes is unusual. OED Online (the Upton-
Kretzschmar regime) gives the US version as /θɔt/ , /θɑt/; the latter
would represent the merged version (no distinction between cot/caught
or LOT/THOUGHT), which may be what we're hearing here. They don't say
where the speaker is from.

[anal...@hotmail.com]

> where the speaker is from.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

The Proto-Indo-European pure long [o] can be heard here (along with
interesting macro cognates) under Indo European "Give".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/words-that-last/

Does any core dialect of present day English have this sound?

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On May 8, 12:31 pm, "analys...@hotmail.com" <analys...@hotmail.com>

Hey! You had me excited there for a fraction of a second. Don't get to
hear many PIE speakers any more.

But no, it's just the latest media blitz from Pagel of Reading (Last
discussed here with his "Oldest English Words" nonsense in 2009).

There seems to be no explanation of where these sound-bites came from.
Are they people speaking actual words of actual languages in these
various families? Or just his students attempting to perform
reconstructions (whose?) from the various proto-languages? Almost
certainly the latter, since it sounds like the same voice in every
one. So how did this speaker master the "Proto-Indo-European pure
long [o]"? Probably by listening to Daniel Jones or one of his heirs.

> Does any core dialect of present day English have this sound?

Scottish would be one. But what's a "core dialect"? One that you're
willing to take seriously?
I don't suppose there's any hope of you explaining what you think the
significance of all this is.