''bath'' and ''Mary''

Gertrude   Thu May 25, 2006 11:17 am GMT
>>Apparently at one point, there was some discussion whether Saturday should be pronounced Sahturday!<<

It is a valid pronuncation among certain Scottish and English dialects.
Damian in Edinburgh   Thu May 25, 2006 12:03 pm GMT
The general Scottish pronunciation of "bath" is actually closer to the Southern English version....different from the Southern English RP or even Cockney / London SE England Estuary with it's drawn out "ah" sound, but longer than the very short, sharp, flat Northern English "bath"...as in the standard, non-affected "pat" or "bat" - you know, as in Corrie.

Scots had a huge influence in New Zealand - some of the place names on South Island, especially, are of Scottish origin - Invercargill, Dunedin, Roxburgh, Duntroon...there's even a St Andrews there! I think I'd feel quite at home there....pity it's all so far from anywhere, and summer in winter and winter in summer is not really Scottish. :-)
Damian in Edinburgh   Thu May 25, 2006 12:09 pm GMT
The old codger (her words not mine) is right about the "Sahturday" bit.....again the general Scottish initial vowel is longer than the standard English English version.....and the "r" is gnerally more clearly sounded. The least sounded letter here, and elsewhere here in the UK (except where old codgers are concerned) would be the "t".....all part of the Estuary effect.
Rick Johnson   Thu May 25, 2006 2:51 pm GMT
I agree with what has been written earlier. To my ears the Scottish "A" sound is elongated, but consistent in its sound. The same is true in the South West of England.

For instance:

Class, classify and classification all have the same vowel sound. Also pass, passage and passenger also have the same vowel sound. However, in the SE, there is a vowel split with "class" being pronounced "kla:s", but the first part of "classify" being pronounced "klas"- likewise pass and passage etc.
Violla   Thu May 25, 2006 9:22 pm GMT
->>The long 'a' sound used in Australia and New Zealand isn't quite the same vowel as the one used in RP though, is it?<<

Benjamin, it is precisely the same vowel as used in RP, which is the standard taught and encouraged throughout Australia for well over a century. -

Long a is not universally used in Australia. Take the word DANCE as an example. In many regions it is pronounced like in the USA and not like in London.
Jim   Fri May 26, 2006 2:56 am GMT

You wrote "Your first sentence expresses your opinion, with which I disagree." What part do you disagree with? I mention that "it is how it sounds to non-Kiwis", yes, how does this imply that it doesn't sound that way to me? It does sound that way to me. Uriel made the correct interpretation.

Yes, "raised" is jargon it means that the mouth is more closed and "centralised" means that the sound is made in the centre of the mouth (as opposed to the back or front).

I dispute no truth: it is not correct to say that "NZers typically pronounce 'pat' as 'pet'". The Kiwi pronunciation of "pat" is close to the North American pronunciation of "pet" but they are still saying "pat".

Do I dispute that the sound they make in "pit" is a schwa? Do I contend that they do not use a sound which is typically unstressed, the schwa, as a substitute for a stressed short I in such words as "pit"? Yes, absolutely.

I not disputing what you say so much as how you say it. A distinction must be drawn between phonetic and phonemic analysis. Phonetically the Kiwi "pit" vowel is very close to a schwa (actually it's more of an [@\] than an [@] (X-SAMPA*)) however phonemically it still remains an /I/.

The Kiwi "pat" is close to the North American "pet" (phonetically [p_hEt]) and somewhere between my Australian "pat" (phonetically [p_h{t]) and "pet" (phonetically [p_het]) but it's still a "pat" (/p{t/) phonemically speaking.

Vowel comparison
Kiwi monophthongs
*X-SAMPA is an alternative to the IPA.
Charles Darwin, Jr.   Fri May 26, 2006 6:17 am GMT
Why are you so crazy when critics are coming around?
Travis   Fri May 26, 2006 6:55 am GMT
>>The Kiwi "pat" is close to the North American "pet" (phonetically [p_hEt]) and somewhere between my Australian "pat" (phonetically [p_h{t]) and "pet" (phonetically [p_het]) but it's still a "pat" (/p{t/) phonemically speaking.<<

Of course, one must include the disclaimer that not NAE dialects have quite the same vowels corresponding to historical [{]. Many Upper Midwestern dialects have turned such into a centering or falling diphthong, which happens to be [E{] or [e{] here but can be as extreme as [i@] or [e@], while many Californian dialects have lowered such towards or to [a].
Nigel   Fri May 26, 2006 7:45 am GMT
>>It is a valid pronuncation among certain Scottish and English dialects.<<

Certainly, and no one has suggested otherwise. The reference was to Australian English

By the way, Gertie, unlike you, I didn't mention when I finished my formal education, so you have demonstrated perfectly what I wrote about a little knowledge...
Gertrude   Fri May 26, 2006 8:00 am GMT
Nini, I hadn't noticed a reference to Australian English.

I have no idea what you were trying to demonstrate but I was being cynical about the hackneyed "death" of education.
Uriel   Mon May 29, 2006 7:48 am GMT
mjd, then. I'm not picky.
Kirk   Mon May 29, 2006 7:56 am GMT
Oh are Brennus' moderating powers only applicable in the 'languages' section and not here? I didn't know that.
Guest   Mon May 29, 2006 7:59 am GMT
It looks like it because the spam only seems to get deleted when mjd's around. So it might be a while til then.
Uriel   Mon May 29, 2006 8:24 am GMT
He has a star by his name here, though. Perhaps he's just not big on deleting spam.
Guest   Mon May 29, 2006 8:47 am GMT
He sure does a good job of deleting spam and so much more in the languages section, though.