|
|
Accent sample
We've been discussing accent samples a lot over the past few days, so I thought we could put them all on the same thread. Here's mine: http://media.putfile.com/Comma-Passage
There are a few interesting things I noted here:
1. "even so" (0:16) there's more off-glide on my /o/ than I had thought, at least in open syllables.
2. "on her first morning" (0:17) sounds like [f3\v\s.mO@nIN]. Very little constriction on /r/; maybe it's assimilated to the following /n/. /3`/ sounds rounded
3. "checked herself in the mirror" (0:20) sounds like [mIr\]
4. "picked up her kit" (0:26) Is there any trace of the Canadian Shift, supposed to lower the front lax vowels, on my 'kit'? Also note that /t/ is [?] instead of [4], despite the following vowel, because of the pause/phrase boundary before 'and'
5. "waiting for her" (0:32) 'for her' sounds like [fO@`]
6. "strong and huge" (1:00) 'huge' [Cj}d_Z] is much further forward than 'goose' (0:32), (0:50); perhaps because of the preceeding [j]
7. "singing a tune" (1:08) [tsIun]
8. "an effective treatment" (1:27) [t_Si?mIn?] is there an [r\] here?
Ah, so you decided to fake a Pacific Northwestern accent? It sounds fine, except for the way you said "treatmeant".
Yes, they do sound very similar. I think most Pacific Northwesterners could pass for Canadian, and vice-versa. I can't really think of any giveaway features I could use to tell one from a Canadian.
You Canadians sound like people from Detroit.
My version of the same passage is at:
http://media.putfile.com/Comma-reading-by-Travis
Disclaimer: I am a native English speaker from Milwaukee, WI, contrary to many individuals who think I happen to be a non-native speaker.
Also, don't mind the strong global l-vocalization, flap elision, and interdental hardening, which are common dialect features here (and in the case of flap elision, is likely to actually be relatively widespread in NAE).
Travis, why do you pronounce "Comma" as Camma? And what on earth is strong global l-vocalization, flap elision, and interdental hardening and NAE?
CD-ROM
for further assistance , call this toll free number: It is specially set up for understanding Travis's posts.
214-NASA-3301
>> CD-ROM
for further assistance , call this toll free number: It is specially set up for understanding Travis's posts.
214-NASA-3301 <<
LOL
>>Travis, why do you pronounce "Comma" as Camma? And what on earth is strong global l-vocalization, flap elision, and interdental hardening and NAE?<<
I pronounce "Comma" as what you perceive as being "Camma" because I have the North Cities Vowel Shift (to an extent), with one result being that the back vowel [A] (as in "father" in General American) has become the front vowel [a]. This front vowel [a] may be perceived by those not familiar with it as the front vowel [{] (as in "trap" in General American).
"l-vocalization" is just the realization of historical /l/ as vowels and or semivowels. Typically it is primarily after vowels (and not between vowels) within words where it occur, in dialects that have it, but in my dialect it can actually happen in *any* position, and readily happens in intervocalic positions in addition to being practically obligatory after vowels, so I specifically noted that by stating that such was "global" (as in affecting all cases of /l/).
By "flap elision", I meant simply the loss of the flap [4] resulting from /t/ and /d/ in intervocalic positions and some other positions (such as between /r/ and a vowel). For instance, a common example of this in North American English dialects is the pronunciation of the word "getting" as ["gEIN] rather than ["gE4IN].
By "interdental hardening", I meant simply the hardening of the fricatives /D/ and, to a lesser extent, /T/. The term "hardening" is essentially meant to be vague, as it can be of varying strength, and may not take the form of full stopping as an alveolar consonant but rather a range of realizations such as affrication or stopping as a dental consonant. One note is that in the dialect here, this mainly occurs word-initially, with the only other case that is generally affected is "with" (even that varies, as I usually only harden "with" in the case of "with the", whereas my SO readily hardens it across the board). Also, /D/ is hardened far more readily than /T/ is here, with many individuals frequently hardening /D/ but not even affricating /T/. For dialects which stronger and more general interdental hardening, one has to look towards dialects further north in Wisconsin than here.
The abbreviation "NAE" stands just for "North American English", that is, the dialect continuum formed by English dialects spoken in mainland North America and the Maritimes in Canada. Note that it does not contain Carribbean English dialects even though geographically one would consider such as being in North America.
One interesting thing is that the beginning of a breath group, I usually pronounce /D/ as an interdental plosive (I suppose a really "mild" form of interdental hardening). I really don't know how to transcribe this sound, though, because [d_d] (like in Spanish, for example) is usually not interpreted as an interdental consonant. Maybe [d_+], or [d_d_d], or [d_d_+]?
Since it's at the exact same point of articulation as [D], I think the difference between these two phones very noticeable. It doesn't sound unnatural for me to use the true fricative [D] at the beginning of a breath group (and I think I do sometimes), but it feels as if the plosive allophone is "easier" to produce there.
I never use this plosive allophone intervocalically:
tether ["t_hED@`]
see the show ["si D@ "S7U]
And after most consonants /D/ is still a true fricative for me, but I always use the plosive allophone after [t] and [d]:
pass the salt ["p_h{s D@ "sQ5t]
get the salt ["gEt d_+@ "sQ5t]
Sorry, a couple of typos:
<One interesting thing is that *at* the...>
<...the difference between these two phones *isn't* very noticeable.>
<<By "flap elision", I meant simply the loss of the flap [4] resulting from /t/ and /d/ in intervocalic positions and some other positions (such as between /r/ and a vowel). For instance, a common example of this in North American English dialects is the pronunciation of the word "getting" as ["gEIN] rather than ["gE4IN].>>
Travis, do you insert a glottal stop between the two vowels? Or do /t/ and /d/ become totally silent? Does it apply in word-final positions?
Intervocalic glottalisation is very common in England, however, it is still considered to be non-standard.
>>Travis, do you insert a glottal stop between the two vowels? Or do /t/ and /d/ become totally silent? Does it apply in word-final positions?<<
I do not insert an intervening glottal stop, but rather the /t/ and /d/ are not realized altogether with the exception that the distinction between the two is still shown by the vowels before them with respect to vowel length and Canadian Raising. Also note that, to a lesser degree, intervocalic /n/, /v/, and, in some words, /D/ also undergo similar elision, and in the case of /n/ it may have a similar effect in nasalizing preceding vowels even when it is lost (but in more unstressed positions this is readily lost).
Note though that this does occur in word-final positions if a following word begins with a vowel, and in particular occurs if a postclitic beginning in a vowel is attached. However, /t/ may be separately lost in other word-final positions as /t/ is usually realized as [?] word-finally IMD when not in a cluster with another obstruent, but when rather unstressed this [?] may be lost in turn. This does not effect word-final /d/, though, which may be devoiced into [t] (this this is still distinguished from /t/ by the length of the preceding vowel and because this is never glottalized). Also, word-final /n/ may be lost in everyday speech, but this is preserved as nasalization of the preceding vowel.
Note, though, that when vowels come into contact with each other due to such elision, they are only preserved as such is the preceding vowel is /e/, /o/, /i/, /u/, /aI/, /aU/, or /OI/; all other preceding vowels are joined with following vowels as falling diphthongs and triphthongs and are timed as a single segment. Such resulting diphthongs and triphthongs, though, take the length of the first vowel, and in more careful speech its nasalization as well (in less careful speech the nasalization of the second vowel is often taken).
Actually, I forgot to mention that such diphthongization does occur if the preceding vowel is /Q/, and in some cases may not occur if it is /E{/; the general pattern is that historical "long" vowels and diphthongs do not trigger such, as with the lax mophthong /Q/ mapping to historical long vowel /O:/ and the diphthong /E{/ mapping to historical short vowel /{/.
|