I have thought a bit more about this, and the pronunciation of the "oo" in some words as /U/ instead of /u/ could be a manifestation of the more general phenomena of an even higher than normal tendency to neutralize vowels in the Minnesotan dialect. Other examples--some pronounce "creek" to rhyme with "Nick," and the stereotypical "ya know" (the a is pronounced like the a in about) and "yeah" pronounced as "yah." Anyone?
"Root"
Previous page Pages: 1 2
The presence of "yah" (which I prefer to write as "ja", being pronounced practically identically with the German word in question, as [ja:], and most likely being a loan from German here) is in no fashion unique to the English in Minnesota, being (very commonly) present in the Milwaukee dialect and in various English dialects in northern Wisconsin. Note, though, that it exists alongside "yeah" here in the Milwaukee dialect, which is generally pronounced as something from [j{] to [jE] to [je{] here. Note that this is not just a pronunciation difference, as "yeah" is generally used as just a weak affirmative here, whereas "ja" can be either a weak affirmative or a strong affirmative depending on degree of stress here.
One note, to Brennus, is that there is not a specific monolithic "Wisconsin English", as there is definite dialect variation within the English spoken here. For instance, the aforementioned "ja" apparently was at least historically not used in the Kenosha area, while it is ubiquitous in the Milwaukee area (my mother has commented on how it is not used in Kenosha, but she seems to have picked it up, having lived quite a while in the Milwaukee area since when she lived there). There is also lexical variation within such, such as whether "soda" or "pop" and "bubbler" or "water fountain" are used, as well as phonological variation, such as the degree of NCVS, the degree of tense vowel monophthongization, the (non-)presence of the /v/-/w/ merger in the speech of non-younger individuals, and like.
One note, to Brennus, is that there is not a specific monolithic "Wisconsin English", as there is definite dialect variation within the English spoken here. For instance, the aforementioned "ja" apparently was at least historically not used in the Kenosha area, while it is ubiquitous in the Milwaukee area (my mother has commented on how it is not used in Kenosha, but she seems to have picked it up, having lived quite a while in the Milwaukee area since when she lived there). There is also lexical variation within such, such as whether "soda" or "pop" and "bubbler" or "water fountain" are used, as well as phonological variation, such as the degree of NCVS, the degree of tense vowel monophthongization, the (non-)presence of the /v/-/w/ merger in the speech of non-younger individuals, and like.
>Me (AusE)
"root", "boot" & "roof" with /}:/ (what Travis calls [u] ... pretty much) &
"foot" with /U/.<
Same here, also AuE.
"root", "boot" & "roof" with /}:/ (what Travis calls [u] ... pretty much) &
"foot" with /U/.<
Same here, also AuE.
>>Lol: What do you mean? You have yet to convince me on this forum that the American English of Wisconsin has any distinguishing chracteristics. On the other hand, I have cited some, from time to time, for Texas and even California.<<
And on what basis do you have to object to what I have said about the Englis here, besides some silly notion that people in the Midwest all speak some kind of idealized General American?
And on what basis do you have to object to what I have said about the Englis here, besides some silly notion that people in the Midwest all speak some kind of idealized General American?
I have the same vowel in "too" "boot" "root" and "roof" and I'm from California. "Root" and "roof" never have [U] (the vowel of "foot" and "butcher") in my speech, tho I've heard some Americans from other places do that.
<<Lol: What do you mean? You have yet to convince me on this forum that the American English of Wisconsin has any distinguishing chracteristics. On the other hand, I have cited some, from time to time, for Texas and even California.>>
Wisconsin English definitely has its own set of things going on as compared to other dialects. From what I've read and heard, native Wisconsinites can generally tell if people are from their state or from neighboring ones, even if to the outsider's ear they all sound vaguely Northern Midwestern.
<<Lol: What do you mean? You have yet to convince me on this forum that the American English of Wisconsin has any distinguishing chracteristics. On the other hand, I have cited some, from time to time, for Texas and even California.>>
Wisconsin English definitely has its own set of things going on as compared to other dialects. From what I've read and heard, native Wisconsinites can generally tell if people are from their state or from neighboring ones, even if to the outsider's ear they all sound vaguely Northern Midwestern.
>>Wisconsin English definitely has its own set of things going on as compared to other dialects. From what I've read and heard, native Wisconsinites can generally tell if people are from their state or from neighboring ones, even if to the outsider's ear they all sound vaguely Northern Midwestern.<<
I myself can often generally recognize someone's accent if they are from the Milwaukee area or not, with such generally just seeming more "familiar" and "right", often without really consciously thinking about it much. Even many people from other areas of Wisconsin who do not seem noticably "accented", such as my mother, still seem less "familiar", for lack of a better term, even if there are not any really noticable features which stand out (by Milwaukee dialect standards, that is).
This likely is not operating on the kinds of features that one necessarily consciously listens for, but rather on more subtle underlying phonological and prosodic features. For example, I know more than one individual from the Milwaukee area who for whatever reason has acquired idiolect features that are quite unlike the dialect here (such as my dad, who, as related to Kirk, has many GAE-isms in his speech, or this one friend of mine who has acquired from theatRE features like an incomplete Mary-merry-marry merger and non-yod-dropping). And yet, their idiolects still sound very familiar except when such specific errant features are expressed, which come off as marked relative to the rest of their speech.
As for Wisconsinites in general, ones from southern Wisconsin generally seem to have more familiar accents than ones from northern Wisconsin, which do generally come off to me as "accented". The main exception to this is that there are a set of lexical isoglosses running north to south (rather than east to west) which separates the far eastern end of Wisconsin from the rest of it. Consequently, the familiar terms "soda" and "bubbler" are more likely to be used in Green Bay than in Stoughton, where the unfamiliar "pop" and "water fountain" are likely to be used, even though otherwise the dialect in Stoughton is likely to be more familiar than that in Green Bay.
Note that I intentionally mentioned Stoughton (which is near Madison) rather than Madison itself as Madison is likely to be "contaminated" by the quantity of students and emigres from Milwaukee there. Aside from a number of friends from the Milwaukee area that I know there, I have run into many individuals there who sounded "too familiar", as in they were likely originally from Milwaukee themselves. On the other hand, Stoughton is near Madison but outlying enough that it is likely to not have nearly as many people, per capita, from Milwaukee.
All of that aside, Wisconsinites in general do in general come off as more familiar speech-wise than even individuals from other parts of the Great Lakes region; for instance, individuals from even as closeby as Indiana (considering the distance along the edge of Lake Michigan from Wisconsin) sound markedly unfamiliar. Even individuals from Minnesota, who generally do not sound quite as unfamiliar, still do sound somewhat "different" as well, for reasons that I cannot really explain myself. Much of this is hard to describe further, as it is less a conscious assessment of idiolect features than simply a subconscious perception of unfamiliarity, but even still individual highly marked differences may be specifically noticed at times, such complete lack of Canadian Raising, never raising historical /A/ before /r/ followed by fortis obstruents, or not having full word-final devoicing in any positions.
I myself can often generally recognize someone's accent if they are from the Milwaukee area or not, with such generally just seeming more "familiar" and "right", often without really consciously thinking about it much. Even many people from other areas of Wisconsin who do not seem noticably "accented", such as my mother, still seem less "familiar", for lack of a better term, even if there are not any really noticable features which stand out (by Milwaukee dialect standards, that is).
This likely is not operating on the kinds of features that one necessarily consciously listens for, but rather on more subtle underlying phonological and prosodic features. For example, I know more than one individual from the Milwaukee area who for whatever reason has acquired idiolect features that are quite unlike the dialect here (such as my dad, who, as related to Kirk, has many GAE-isms in his speech, or this one friend of mine who has acquired from theatRE features like an incomplete Mary-merry-marry merger and non-yod-dropping). And yet, their idiolects still sound very familiar except when such specific errant features are expressed, which come off as marked relative to the rest of their speech.
As for Wisconsinites in general, ones from southern Wisconsin generally seem to have more familiar accents than ones from northern Wisconsin, which do generally come off to me as "accented". The main exception to this is that there are a set of lexical isoglosses running north to south (rather than east to west) which separates the far eastern end of Wisconsin from the rest of it. Consequently, the familiar terms "soda" and "bubbler" are more likely to be used in Green Bay than in Stoughton, where the unfamiliar "pop" and "water fountain" are likely to be used, even though otherwise the dialect in Stoughton is likely to be more familiar than that in Green Bay.
Note that I intentionally mentioned Stoughton (which is near Madison) rather than Madison itself as Madison is likely to be "contaminated" by the quantity of students and emigres from Milwaukee there. Aside from a number of friends from the Milwaukee area that I know there, I have run into many individuals there who sounded "too familiar", as in they were likely originally from Milwaukee themselves. On the other hand, Stoughton is near Madison but outlying enough that it is likely to not have nearly as many people, per capita, from Milwaukee.
All of that aside, Wisconsinites in general do in general come off as more familiar speech-wise than even individuals from other parts of the Great Lakes region; for instance, individuals from even as closeby as Indiana (considering the distance along the edge of Lake Michigan from Wisconsin) sound markedly unfamiliar. Even individuals from Minnesota, who generally do not sound quite as unfamiliar, still do sound somewhat "different" as well, for reasons that I cannot really explain myself. Much of this is hard to describe further, as it is less a conscious assessment of idiolect features than simply a subconscious perception of unfamiliarity, but even still individual highly marked differences may be specifically noticed at times, such complete lack of Canadian Raising, never raising historical /A/ before /r/ followed by fortis obstruents, or not having full word-final devoicing in any positions.
Previous page Pages: 1 2