Surrey vowels
Emungo
house and on my new commute into town my train passes through a
station (pre-1974 Surrey, now Greater London) called New Malden.
Everyone I know (RP or non-RP SE BrEng) pronounces the second word of
this toponym as "'mo:ld@n". I hope I've got the transcription right -
the first syllable is meant to have the same vowel sound as BrEng
"ball", "haul".
The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
etc. The voice is clearly and consistently RP in every other syllable
it enunciates for the entire journey. (Irrelevant feature of the
anecdote: hearing the voice say this name like this makes me
irationally angry, rather as Mrs Thatcher's pronunciation of 'nuclear'
used to.)
I have since noticed that on a reproduction of a late 17th-century map
of Surrey on my wall at home the nearby village (now suburb) of
Tolworth is written Talworth. Could this be the same sound change? Is
it a feature of SE or even specifically Surrey dialect?
Even if it is, I am surprised by the fact that the careful, RP train
announcement observes it in the New Malden case. There are place names
in the SE where the dialectical pronunciation has entered RP: East
London / Essex Plaistow ("'plAstoU") is a classic case. But I'm fairly
sure NM is not one of them. Any ideas?
(One possibility: London Transport recently sacked, for amusing
reasons, the female announcer whose recorded voice they use throughout
the tube network. She was interviewed on tv, and turned out to have a
strong (and rather pleasant) northern accent, quite different from the
RP she used for the recordings. Maybe the train announceress is
actually a Surrey lass with a broad set of local vowels, repressed in
every case except this one.)
Brian M. Scott
<pyt...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in sci.lang:
> A bit parochial this, so I apologize in advance. I hav just moved
> house and on my new commute into town my train passes through a
> station (pre-1974 Surrey, now Greater London) called New Malden.
> Everyone I know (RP or non-RP SE BrEng) pronounces the second word of
> this toponym as "'mo:ld@n". I hope I've got the transcription right -
> the first syllable is meant to have the same vowel sound as BrEng
> "ball", "haul".
You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
> The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
> however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
> again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
> etc.
If it's an RP version of that vowel, it's probably closer to
[@U].
[...]
Brian
Brian M. Scott
<b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in
<news:5jys4mst3q6n.y...@40tude.net> in sci.lang:
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 09:46:35 -0700 (PDT), Emungo
> <pyt...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in sci.lang:
>> A bit parochial this, so I apologize in advance. I hav just moved
>> house and on my new commute into town my train passes through a
>> station (pre-1974 Surrey, now Greater London) called New Malden.
>> Everyone I know (RP or non-RP SE BrEng) pronounces the second word of
>> this toponym as "'mo:ld@n". I hope I've got the transcription right -
>> the first syllable is meant to have the same vowel sound as BrEng
>> "ball", "haul".
> You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
The name is from OE <mć:l>, here 'a cross, a crucifix', and
<du:n> 'a hill'. The Maldon from which New Maldon took its
name is in record as <Meldon(e)> 1086-1138, <Meaudon(a)>
1215-64, <Maldon> 1225-1325, <Maldene> 1241, <Mauden> 1249,
<Maulden> 1602.
>> The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
>> however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
>> again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
>> etc.
> If it's an RP version of that vowel, it's probably closer to
> [@U].
And now that I'm with my books, I see that Malden in Essex,
which has the same etymology, was locally pronounced
['mo:ld@n] within the last century or so; ['m@Uld@n] would
be an RP version of this. If this pronunciation is still
current, it might have influenced the recorded pronunciation
of the Surrey name.
Brian
Brian M. Scott
in sci.lang:
<snip (New) Malden pronounced ['m@Uld@n]>
> I have since noticed that on a reproduction of a late
> 17th-century map of Surrey on my wall at home the nearby
> village (now suburb) of Tolworth is written Talworth.
> Could this be the same sound change?
Related, but not the same. The first element goes back to
an Old English masculine name <Tala>, and <Tol-> spellings
don't appear until the 17th century; in certain environments
Middle English /Al/ became Early Modern English /AUl/ and
eventually RP /O:l/. This change would also yield your
pronunciation of <Malden>. The [o:l] in the ['mo:ld@n]
pronunciation recorded for Malden in Essex (see other post)
would be a normal development from a Middle English /Ol/ via
Early Mod. Eng. /O:Ul/. (Thus, in the relevant environments
/l/ had the effect of diphthongizing non-high back vowels.)
I couldn't tell you whether the change of Mid. Eng. /Al/ to
/Ol/ in the Essex place-name was a feature of the local
dialect or merely a sporadic change, and I don't know
whether it really belongs to the Surrey place-name at all.
[...]
Brian
Ruud Harmsen
<b.s...@csuohio.edu>: in sci.lang:
Is it at all possible to distinguish between [Ul] where the l is
velarised (which in the mentioned position it is), and just a
velarised [l]?
In other words, can you hear the difference? Is there any at all?
Did she really say what you (the OP, that is) think you heard?
--
Ruud Harmsen
http://rudhar.com
Brian M. Scott
<realema...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote in
<news:n03l24lvprcq995eg...@4ax.com> in
sci.lang:
> Tue, 13 May 2008 13:14:43 -0400: "Brian M. Scott"
> <b.s...@csuohio.edu>: in sci.lang:
>>On Tue, 13 May 2008 09:46:35 -0700 (PDT), Emungo
>><pyt...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in sci.lang:
>>> A bit parochial this, so I apologize in advance. I hav just moved
>>> house and on my new commute into town my train passes through a
>>> station (pre-1974 Surrey, now Greater London) called New Malden.
>>> Everyone I know (RP or non-RP SE BrEng) pronounces the second word of
>>> this toponym as "'mo:ld@n". I hope I've got the transcription right -
>>> the first syllable is meant to have the same vowel sound as BrEng
>>> "ball", "haul".
>>You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
>>> The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
>>> however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
>>> again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
>>> etc.
>>If it's an RP version of that vowel, it's probably closer to
>>[@U].
> Is it at all possible to distinguish between [Ul] where the l is
> velarised (which in the mentioned position it is), and just a
> velarised [l]?
It's very easy to distinguish between [@Ul] and [@l]. And
the degree of velarization of the /l/ can vary considerably
even in this position.
[...]
Brian
Richard Herring
<b.s...@csuohio.edu> writes
Minor nit: you have the (modern) spelling backwards. <Malden> in Surrey,
<Maldon> in Essex.
--
Richard Herring
Emungo
wrote:
> Tue, 13 May 2008 13:14:43 -0400: "Brian M. Scott"
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Tue, 13 May 2008 09:46:35 -0700 (PDT), Emungo
>
> >> A bit parochial this, so I apologize in advance. I hav just moved
> >> house and on my new commute into town my train passes through a
> >> station (pre-1974 Surrey, now Greater London) called New Malden.
> >> Everyone I know (RP or non-RP SE BrEng) pronounces the second word of
> >> this toponym as "'mo:ld@n". I hope I've got the transcription right -
> >> the first syllable is meant to have the same vowel sound as BrEng
> >> "ball", "haul".
>
> >You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
>
> >> The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
> >> however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
> >> again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
> >> etc.
>
> >If it's an RP version of that vowel, it's probably closer to
> >[@U].
>
> Is it at all possible to distinguish between [Ul] where the l is
> velarised (which in the mentioned position it is), and just a
> velarised [l]?
> In other words, can you hear the difference? Is there any at all?
> Did she really say what you (the OP, that is) think you heard?
>
> --
>
> - Show quoted text -
I (think I) know what you are getting at and agree that in the case of
some speakers it is hard to tell, but in the case in point I am as
sure as I can be about any sound I hear in another person's speech
that this is what she is saying.
Emungo
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 13:14:43 -0400, "Brian M. Scott"
> <news:5jys4mst3q6n.y...@40tude.net> in sci.lang:
> > You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
Yes - a silly slip, sorry.
>
> The name is from OE <mæ:l>, here 'a cross, a crucifix', and
> <du:n> 'a hill'. The Maldon from which New Maldon took its
> name is in record as <Meldon(e)> 1086-1138, <Meaudon(a)>
> 1215-64, <Maldon> 1225-1325, <Maldene> 1241, <Mauden> 1249,
> <Maulden> 1602.
>
> >> The recorded female voice announcing the stations on the train,
> >> however, clearly and carefully enunciates the word as "'moUld@n" -
> >> again, hope I've got it right but it rhymes with 'olden', 'embolden'
> >> etc.
> > If it's an RP version of that vowel, it's probably closer to
> > [@U].
Ah, didn't consider that permutation. Thanks.
>
> And now that I'm with my books, I see that Malden in Essex,
> which has the same etymology, was locally pronounced
> ['mo:ld@n] within the last century or so; ['m@Uld@n] would
> be an RP version of this. If this pronunciation is still
> current, it might have influenced the recorded pronunciation
> of the Surrey name.
Nice idea. She may have been coached or schooled by a South-West
Trains person from the area, and RP-ized what she heard.
Many thanks for your responses, including on Ta/olworth. I must try
and find an aged native of New Malden and eavesdrop until s/he
mentions the placename, to see whether it comes out as ['mo:ld@n].
Ruud Harmsen
<b.s...@csuohio.edu>: in sci.lang:
>It's very easy to distinguish between [@Ul] and [@l]. And
>the degree of velarization of the /l/ can vary considerably
>even in this position.
The Dutch words <vernieuwd> and <vernield> (in the large areas that
have an l-velarisation very similar to that of British English) are
very hard to distinguish. In theory, the only difference is
lip-rounding in the first, but nobody seems to hear that.
The funny thing is, the meaning is very different:
verniewd = renewed, renovated
vernield = destroyed, vandalised.
The verbs vernielen and vernieuwen are easy to distinguish though,
because then the l, being between vowels, is not velarised.
Can you hear the difference between English <told> and <toad>?
Probably yes, because the l still has some contact, in BrE (as I
learnt when listening to Mary Hopkins, over 30 years ago). In Dutch,
the velarised l tends to be an approximant, without really touching
anything even in the mddle.
That means if _I_ said told and toad with my Dutch accent of English,
you'd probably confuse the two words.
Nathan Sanders
Ruud Harmsen <realema...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote:
> Can you hear the difference between English <told> and <toad>?
I don't know about BrE, but in the part of the southern US that I'm
from (rural NW Georgia), these are homonyms (both also having the
/o/-fronting found in many southern US dialects).
Nathan
--
Nathan Sanders
Linguistics Program
Williams College
http://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/
Brian M. Scott
<realema...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote in
<news:0bsl24h9v6m763fcr...@4ax.com> in
sci.lang:
[...]
> Can you hear the difference between English <told> and <toad>?
I'm pretty sure that there are southern U.S. varieties in
which they're true homonyms; in the varieties that I've
heard most often, however, they're distinct.
[...]
Brian
anal...@hotmail.com
> In article <0bsl24h9v6m763fcrt3ikq0g6hh7e69...@4ax.com>,
> Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Can you hear the difference between English <told> and <toad>?
>
> I don't know about BrE, but in the part of the southern US that I'm
> from (rural NW Georgia), these are homonyms (both also having the
> /o/-fronting found in many southern US dialects).
>
> Nathan
>
> --
> Nathan Sanders
> Linguistics Program
> Williams Collegehttp://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/
Interesting.
How about the last names "Bowden" and 'Bouldin" ?
would they be homonyms in any dialect you are aware of?
Thanks.
Peter T. Daniels
How is the latter pronounced?
yoke and yolk rhyme, poke and Polk don't.
anal...@hotmail.com
I am asking because I once had to meet a Mr. Bouldin and he wanted to
make sure I wanted him and not a Mr. Bowden who was also present in
the room.
>
> yoke and yolk rhyme, poke and Polk don't.- Hide quoted text -
"horse" and "hoarse" being homonyms is absolutely surprising to me -
after decades of assuming that I was (correctly) saying them
differently.
Peter T. Daniels
> On May 14, 3:42 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On May 14, 1:40 pm, analys...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On May 14, 10:31 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
> > > > In article <0bsl24h9v6m763fcrt3ikq0g6hh7e69...@4ax.com>,
> > > > Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > > Can you hear the difference between English <told> and <toad>?
>
> > > > I don't know about BrE, but in the part of the southern US that I'm
> > > > from (rural NW Georgia), these are homonyms (both also having the
> > > > /o/-fronting found in many southern US dialects).
> > > Interesting.
>
> > > How about the last names "Bowden" and 'Bouldin" ?
>
> > > would they be homonyms in any dialect you are aware of?
>
> > How is the latter pronounced?
>
> I am asking because I once had to meet a Mr. Bouldin and he wanted to
> make sure I wanted him and not a Mr. Bowden who was also present in
> the room.
>
> > yoke and yolk rhyme, poke and Polk don't.-
>
> "horse" and "hoarse" being homonyms is absolutely surprising to me -
> after decades of assuming that I was (correctly) saying them
> differently.
Who's to say you _weren't_ saying them differently? However, they are
only different in tiny parts of the English-speaking world.
Nathan Sanders
<6e48e6ea-e6ae-48d1...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
anal...@hotmail.com wrote:
I don't recall ever seeing/hearing the name "Bouldin", so I don't know
how this specific name would be handled. I imagine it is very well
could be merged with "Bowden" in some dialects, like the one I'm
talking about above, but I can't say for sure.
Emungo
> On 13 May, 20:56, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 13 May 2008 13:14:43 -0400, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <b.sc...@csuohio.edu> wrote in
> > <news:5jys4mst3q6n.y...@40tude.net> in sci.lang:
> > > You probably want ['mO:ld@n].
On the bus this morning I noticed (not, in fact, for the first time)
that something similar though by no means so distinct happens to the
first syllable of 'Aldwych' as announced by the recorded female voce
on the number 76 bus. (Aldwych is the area on the Westminster side of
Waterloo bridge.) In standard RP, as used by the voice in every other
syllable that I have heard, one would expect ['O:l]. Instead one gets
a rather strangulated sound approaching ['@Ul], rather as if the
speaker started saying the latter and then tried, slightly too late,
to switch to the former. Or vice versa.
Here, of course, we are dealing with the theme 'old' ('vetus vicus' in
1199, 'Oldewiche' in 1393), and though this may strike some as
unlikely I think there may be some general awareness - or rather a
fortuitously correct assumption - that that is what the element means.
I say 'fortuitously' because it would be indistinguishable from the
false belief that 'ald-' in the City toponym Aldgate also means 'old',
a belief that is certainly widely held and possibly influences
pronunciation. (I don't travel through that part, so I don't get to
hear announcers' treatment of it.) It naturally tends to form part of
the doubly wrong idea that Aldgate = 'old gate', a view expressed
forcefully to me in City pubs more than once. In the Aldwych case
there is no convenient (mis)interpretation of the second element
available, but it is so common in place names that I would suggest
people don't necessarily need to know what it means to grasp the name
as the second, distinct element in a ditheme. Alternatively, the
pronunciation might be simple influence from Aldgate, or the same
sound change found in the New Malden case.
> > The name is from OE <mæ:l>, here 'a cross, a crucifix', and
> > <du:n> 'a hill'. The Maldon from which New Maldon took its
> > name is in record as <Meldon(e)> 1086-1138, <Meaudon(a)>
> > 1215-64, <Maldon> 1225-1325, <Maldene> 1241, <Mauden> 1249,
> > <Maulden> 1602.
I see there's also a Maulden in Bedfordshire which Margaret Gelling
brings in under the same group in Place Names in the Landscape.
What is this OE <mæ:l> 'cross, crucifix'? Any surviving cognates in
other Germanic languages?