When I think of 'cawfee', I think New York/New Jersey area. I don't know how accurate that is, but that's the stereotype around here.
Caw-fee
I couldn't agree more with American Nic.
I have heard on the news, however, that New York has been hit with a migration of Mid-Westerners in recent years so not everyone living there today is, of course, going to speak with a New York accent.
Which accent (New York or Mid-West) will win out there in the long run is difficult to predict but if New York City is protected by its geography in the way that Texas and California are, the New York accent just might survive.
I have heard on the news, however, that New York has been hit with a migration of Mid-Westerners in recent years so not everyone living there today is, of course, going to speak with a New York accent.
Which accent (New York or Mid-West) will win out there in the long run is difficult to predict but if New York City is protected by its geography in the way that Texas and California are, the New York accent just might survive.
I've heard lots of Americans here say something like "caaaah-fee"....almost makes it even more fun to go to Coffee Republic or Starbucks. To me it sounds more like "caaaah-fee" than "caw-fee" but I guess none of the Amicans I hear come from New York or New Jersey.
In fact, Scots tend to say our own version of "caw-fee" ...more like "cor-fee" (without pronouncing the R for once!) while the English go for the basic "coff-ee".
In fact, Scots tend to say our own version of "caw-fee" ...more like "cor-fee" (without pronouncing the R for once!) while the English go for the basic "coff-ee".
I have /kAfi/ --> ["k_hAfi] for "coffee," which is the same vowel I have in "cot" and "father." Apparently all Americans without the "cot-caught" merger (so, 50-60% of the US) distinguish the vowel in "coffee" and "cot." This means many (not all, I know, I'm not dealing with the shifts or other tangentially related mergers here) have /O/ for "coffee" while /A/ for "cot," so it's clearly not just New York that does this.
Interesting the New York topic came up again now, because I recently started classes again and one of my professors is from Brooklyn. Since "cot-caught" merged accents are almost never heard here, it's fun to listen to him lecture--I have to admit since I know few "cot-caught" nonmergers and even fewer from NYC, when I hear him speak I think of movies set in NYC with characters from there. It's great.
Interesting the New York topic came up again now, because I recently started classes again and one of my professors is from Brooklyn. Since "cot-caught" merged accents are almost never heard here, it's fun to listen to him lecture--I have to admit since I know few "cot-caught" nonmergers and even fewer from NYC, when I hear him speak I think of movies set in NYC with characters from there. It's great.
<<Since "cot-caught" merged accents are almost never heard here>>
I assume you meant ''cot-caught nonmerged accents''.
I assume you meant ''cot-caught nonmerged accents''.
All of this is rather weird, because before this discussion I did not even conceive of "coffee" being /"kAfi/ *anywhere* outside of "cot"-"caught"-merged areas, with /"kAfi/ reminding me more of German "Kaffee", which is /"kafe:/, than English "coffee". Similarly, the whole idea of /"kOfi/ somehow being associated with New York is quite alien to me, and the very suggestion of such I had not heard of before reading such on here. Of course, then, I am the sort who perceives things in the *formal* register of the dialect in the Milwaukee area as being "standard", unless it is quite strongly clear that such is rather local in nature, and even then that does not always apply, and most likely have little actual day to day contact with other NAE dialects as spoken by native speakers from outside the Upper Midwest.
There are some things that are clearly not "standard" in the my dialect from my point of view, such as the palatalization of historical /st/ in words like "sister" and "yesterday", but in those cases, such forms usually coexist with more "standard" forms in the formal register. But even still, there are forms like /"kOfi/ for "coffee" and /"sori/ for "sorry" which to me are the default forms of such, with /"kAfi/ and /"sAri/ being perceived by myself as not "standard" but rather the opposite, even though they turn out to be the dominant forms throughout the US.
There are some things that are clearly not "standard" in the my dialect from my point of view, such as the palatalization of historical /st/ in words like "sister" and "yesterday", but in those cases, such forms usually coexist with more "standard" forms in the formal register. But even still, there are forms like /"kOfi/ for "coffee" and /"sori/ for "sorry" which to me are the default forms of such, with /"kAfi/ and /"sAri/ being perceived by myself as not "standard" but rather the opposite, even though they turn out to be the dominant forms throughout the US.
<<I have /kAfi/ --> ["k_hAfi] for "coffee," which is the same vowel I have in "cot" and "father." Apparently all Americans without the "cot-caught" merger (so, 50-60% of the US) distinguish the vowel in "coffee" and "cot." This means many (not all, I know, I'm not dealing with the shifts or other tangentially related mergers here) have /O/ for "coffee" while /A/ for "cot," so it's clearly not just New York that does this.>>
I think the reason why this is associated with New York is because New Yorkers tend to use a closer vowel than most c-c unmerged Americans in words like "caught". Most c-c unmerged Americans (from what I've read, and from hearing people speak on TV) tend to use a lower vowel, closer to [Q], for words like "caught", reserving [O] for use before R, as in "sore". New Yorkers tend to actually use [O] for words like "caught", and would be more likely to perceive "caught" and "sore" as having the same vowel sound.
The problem is that American transcription traditionally uses [O] for any low rounded back vowel, even though [Q] might be a more accurate symbol in many instances. Just from listening to people on TV, it's evident that most c-c unmerged Americans don't use the same vowel for "caught" as an RP speaker would. The New York pronunciation, on the other hand, *would* probably sound much the same as RP "caught".
I think the reason why this is associated with New York is because New Yorkers tend to use a closer vowel than most c-c unmerged Americans in words like "caught". Most c-c unmerged Americans (from what I've read, and from hearing people speak on TV) tend to use a lower vowel, closer to [Q], for words like "caught", reserving [O] for use before R, as in "sore". New Yorkers tend to actually use [O] for words like "caught", and would be more likely to perceive "caught" and "sore" as having the same vowel sound.
The problem is that American transcription traditionally uses [O] for any low rounded back vowel, even though [Q] might be a more accurate symbol in many instances. Just from listening to people on TV, it's evident that most c-c unmerged Americans don't use the same vowel for "caught" as an RP speaker would. The New York pronunciation, on the other hand, *would* probably sound much the same as RP "caught".
That is interesting, Lazar, as at least here /O/ is definitely higher than /A/, and furthermore will contrast with /Q/, which is not a native phoneme here but which I can still realize nonetheless, like the non-native phoneme /x/. Then, of course, I don't have /O/ before /r/ except in a few marginal cases like the name "Lawry" and the interjection "rawr", but rather /o/, which is realized as either [o] or [o:] depending on context. And yes, I do distinctly perceive "caught" and "sore" as having very different vowel sounds, even though to me "caught" isn't simply a rounded version of "cot".
<<New Yorkers tend to actually use [O] for words like "caught", and would be more likely to perceive "caught" and "sore" as having the same vowel sound.>>
Yes, ''caught'' /kOt/ and ''sore'' /sOr/ have the same vowel for me.
Yes, ''caught'' /kOt/ and ''sore'' /sOr/ have the same vowel for me.
<<That is interesting, Lazar, as at least here /O/ is definitely higher than /A/, and furthermore will contrast with /Q/, which is not a native phoneme here but which I can still realize nonetheless, like the non-native phoneme /x/. Then, of course, I don't have /O/ before /r/ except in a few marginal cases like the name "Lawry" and the interjection "rawr", but rather /o/, which is realized as either [o] or [o:] depending on context. And yes, I do distinctly perceive "caught" and "sore" as having very different vowel sounds, even though to me "caught" isn't simply a rounded version of "cot".>>
There are indeed many c-c unmerged Americans who use [O] for "caught". I've heard a Michigan speaker who used [O] there, so it might be the predominant pronunciation in the Upper Midwest.
But the GA accent that I hear on TV often tends to verge more into [Q]. You share with it a split of the British [O] phoneme, using [O] and [o] where GA may tend more to use [Q] and [O]. It makes sense that if you have a higher vowel for "sore" than GA does, then you might also have a higher vowel for "caught" than GA does.
The ambiguity between [O] and [Q] in American English transcription can also be seen in transcriptions of the Eastern New England "caught-cot" vowel - some sources say it's [O] and others say it's [Q]. I originally transcribed my own ENE "caught-cot" vowel as [O], simply because I used a rounded back vowel there, but eventually I switched to [Q] as I realized that this was a much more accurate representation of how I spoke.
This dialect survey response: http://cfprod01.imt.uwm.edu/Dept/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_6.html and this one: http://cfprod01.imt.uwm.edu/Dept/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_11.html illustrate how most Americans use different vowels in "caught" and "sore".
There are indeed many c-c unmerged Americans who use [O] for "caught". I've heard a Michigan speaker who used [O] there, so it might be the predominant pronunciation in the Upper Midwest.
But the GA accent that I hear on TV often tends to verge more into [Q]. You share with it a split of the British [O] phoneme, using [O] and [o] where GA may tend more to use [Q] and [O]. It makes sense that if you have a higher vowel for "sore" than GA does, then you might also have a higher vowel for "caught" than GA does.
The ambiguity between [O] and [Q] in American English transcription can also be seen in transcriptions of the Eastern New England "caught-cot" vowel - some sources say it's [O] and others say it's [Q]. I originally transcribed my own ENE "caught-cot" vowel as [O], simply because I used a rounded back vowel there, but eventually I switched to [Q] as I realized that this was a much more accurate representation of how I spoke.
This dialect survey response: http://cfprod01.imt.uwm.edu/Dept/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_6.html and this one: http://cfprod01.imt.uwm.edu/Dept/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_11.html illustrate how most Americans use different vowels in "caught" and "sore".
<<Is the NY "aw" vowel simply [O]? It sounds like something more unique or there is another sound produced after it.>>
For some New Yorkers, the ''aw'' vowel can shift to sound more like /O@/ or even /U@/! I don't have that feature in my accent.
For some New Yorkers, the ''aw'' vowel can shift to sound more like /O@/ or even /U@/! I don't have that feature in my accent.
<<For some New Yorkers, the ''aw'' vowel can shift to sound more like /O@/ or even /U@/! I don't have that feature in my accent.>>
Yes, that's true. When people try to put on a stereotypical New York accent, they tend to use [U@], like Mike Myers in "Coffee Talk".
Yes, that's true. When people try to put on a stereotypical New York accent, they tend to use [U@], like Mike Myers in "Coffee Talk".
<< "Since "cot-caught" merged accents are almost never heard here"
I assume you meant ''cot-caught nonmerged accents''.>>>>
Yes, oops. Sorry!
I assume you meant ''cot-caught nonmerged accents''.>>>>
Yes, oops. Sorry!
It's coffee [kafi] for me
co- in coffee like co- in cop, copy :)
I don't say cawffee, cawpy :p
I believe coffee (cawffee) is some kind of regional pronunciation (East&South) [General American normally excludes these regions :))
co- in coffee like co- in cop, copy :)
I don't say cawffee, cawpy :p
I believe coffee (cawffee) is some kind of regional pronunciation (East&South) [General American normally excludes these regions :))