I don't generally have the poor-pour merger, but for me this word is pronounced [jOr/] when stressed, rather than [jUr/] as might be expected. This is the only word for which I have [Or/] in a historically CURE word; do any of you know where this might come from? Does the [jUr/] form occur in any varieties?
Your
I know that the [jUr\] form does occur in some varieties (and have heard it in use myself), but it seems that [jOr\] (or equivalent) is by far the most common stressed pronunciation for "your" today, even in dialects which otherwise completely lack the poor-pour merger (such as my own, even though my dialect has the additional shift of [U] to [u] in POOR words and the stressed realizations of CURE words).
Yeah, I likewise do not have the poor-pour merger, but "your" is a special case. When it's stressed, I pronounce it [jO@`].
<<Does the [jUr/] form occur in any varieties?>>
I know that /jur/ is used in Scottish English.
<<Does the [jUr/] form occur in any varieties?>>
I know that /jur/ is used in Scottish English.
>>your [j@r]
yours [j@rz]for me<<
Is this actually consistent across the board, or are these actually just unstressed realizations? For instance, it is extremely common to have such realizations in English dialects in general, but they are normally in alternation with stressed realizations without such reduction (such as [jR=:] and [jR=:s] respectively in my dialect).
yours [j@rz]for me<<
Is this actually consistent across the board, or are these actually just unstressed realizations? For instance, it is extremely common to have such realizations in English dialects in general, but they are normally in alternation with stressed realizations without such reduction (such as [jR=:] and [jR=:s] respectively in my dialect).
Is it yours?
[Iz@t'j@rz]?
This pronunciation is normal in California (and Florida).
[Iz@t'j@rz]?
This pronunciation is normal in California (and Florida).
<<Is it yours?
[Iz@t'j@rz]?
This pronunciation is normal in California (and Florida).>>
That would be accepted here too, but I think [jOrz] would be more likely. For sentence like "It's not my house, it's yours," [jOrz] is pretty much mandatory.
[Iz@t'j@rz]?
This pronunciation is normal in California (and Florida).>>
That would be accepted here too, but I think [jOrz] would be more likely. For sentence like "It's not my house, it's yours," [jOrz] is pretty much mandatory.
I have heard some North Americans use /jr\=z/ for stressed "yours", as in, "Is it yours?", but /jOr\z/ is the only form that I would naturally use there.
<<I have heard some North Americans use /jr\=z/ for stressed "yours", as in, "Is it yours?", but /jOr\z/ is the only form that I would naturally use there.>>
I generally have /jr\=z/ there. What about "you're"? I pronounce it the same way.
I generally have /jr\=z/ there. What about "you're"? I pronounce it the same way.
>>I have heard some North Americans use /jr\=z/ for stressed "yours", as in, "Is it yours?", but /jOr\z/ is the only form that I would naturally use there.<<
[jR=:s] can be heard in the dialect here as an unstressed realization, but likewise for "yours" the stressed pronunciation [jO:Rs] is more common in practice in everyday speech here (whereas for "your" as an independent word or part of "yourself" or "yourselves" [jR=:] is comparatively more common in relationship to [jO:R]).
[jR=:s] can be heard in the dialect here as an unstressed realization, but likewise for "yours" the stressed pronunciation [jO:Rs] is more common in practice in everyday speech here (whereas for "your" as an independent word or part of "yourself" or "yourselves" [jR=:] is comparatively more common in relationship to [jO:R]).