Monophthongs in old non-rhotic accents

Alexander McLeay   Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:16 am GMT
Most, if not all, accents distinguish 'player' and 'prayer' by vowel (in addition to consonant): the first one is \ay\+\er\, whereas the second is \air\.

In most, if not all, current non-rhotic accents, a long \ay\ is a diphthong: [æi] or [ei] or similar. \Air\ may or may not be, with some saying [e:] and others saying [e@]. In some pronunciations, historical and regional, of English, though, \ay\ is still a monophthong, being then usually [e].

My question, is how did/do non-rhotic dialects of English that pronounce \air\ as [e@], distinguish player [ple@] from prayer [pre@]? Are they rhymes, or is there some other distinction/notation necessary?

(I used [@] for a schwa, as in (X-)SAMPA. People here seem to use it for ash i.e. æ, but I'm not sure how to write the schwa, then.)
Trawick   Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:31 pm GMT
I don't quite understand why this is a "non-rhotic" issue. Generally speaking, in American English at least, "Prayer" tends to be a monothong while "player" is a dipthong (with the notable exception of most southern dialects and perhaps some New England ones as well).

I would also point out the most non-rhotic dialects pronounce "player" as [plei@], not [ple@].
Alexander McLeay   Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:39 pm GMT
Rhotic dialects that use a monophthong for \ay\ still have the option of distinguishing /@r/ and /r/, but in non-rhotic they're both /@/.

I know that most non-rhotic dialects use a diphthong for \ay\ i.e. /ei/ or /æi/. I was asking specifically about accents that don't use the diphthong for \ay\, for instance 19th century RP.
Tom K.   Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:30 pm GMT
I don't know if I missed something when I read this, but shouldn't they be distinguished by their CONSONANTS?
Joe   Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:53 pm GMT
Yep,

''player'' and ''prayer'' are distinguished by they're consonants. ''player'' has /pl/ and ''prayer'' has /pr/.
bimbi   Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:48 pm GMT
Hi, I am from abroad, recently in us. Actually, i an educated although.i have a problem of english language. There is no problem for reading and writing.But conversation is a serious problen. How to improve without having practice. I stay at home all the time.Nobody is in contact to have conversation.In this situation what shouls i do to be fluent in english language,could you please favour me?giving a reliable suggestion.


regarding Bimbi
Jim   Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:08 am GMT
Bimbi,

I hate to say it but your "There is no problem for reading and writing." is not 100% true. How to improve? Study. If you've got nobody to talk to, talk to yourself but first be sure that what you're saying is correct.

Alexander McLeay,

Somewhat off topic but you write

"In some pronunciations, historical and regional, of English, though, \ay\ is still a monophthong, being then usually [e]."

What interests me is the "still" as if diphthongisation were a later development. Is it? I don't believe so ... at least not where spelt <ay>.

Now to your question: I'm afraid I really can't answer it for sure though being unfamiliar with the accents you write of but my guess is that either the distinction (besides /r/ v. /l/) could be a matter of syllable division, /ple:.@/ vs. /pre@/, or perhaps there is no distinction.
Kirk   Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:10 am GMT
From what I've read, after the Great Vowel Shift completed by the 1500s-1600s, /e/ was usually monophthongal and acquired a diphthongal quality later on, so saying a dialect "still" has monophthongal /e/ makes some sense. Then, of course, in recent times in North American English it appears some dialects formerly with strong /eI/ are losing that feature in favor of a monophthong. I, personally, have a monophthongal /e/ in closed position, with the option of it being diphthongal in word-final position (it still may be monophthongal, tho). I should mention even if it is realized as a diphthong for me, the [I] is still slight. The /eI/ I've heard in British speech has much more marked /e/ followed by a very noticeable /I/, something I wouldn't have even in the case I diphthongized at all. For instance:

"cake" [kek]
"plate" [plet]
"day" [de] or possible slight [deI]

I also have this feature with /o/. My /o/ is not very rounded and is somewhat centralized, so it's more mid than back. The exception to this is before velar l /5/, where it pulls the vowel back and rounds it.

"cope" [kop]
"soak" [sok]
"dough" [do] possible slight [oU]

What's interesting is that here in California this open-closed contrast seems to have also affected /u/, which was traditionally not diphthongal in any position. I use /M/, which is the unrounded equivalent of /u/, but it's much fronter than that--it's somewhere in between /M/ and /1/ but I usually just mark it with /M/. In open position the diphthongal /M/ acquires a centralized or fronted starting point, so, I mark it either as [IM] or [@M].

"shoot" [SMt]
"moon" [mMn]
"too" [tM] or [tIM]/[t@M]
"you" [jM] or [jM]/[j@M]

As for the whole "player/prayer" thing for nonrhotic accents, like the others said I think they'd be distinguished even if they had the same consonant. I'm rhotic, but I certainly would distinguish them, having "player" [ple@`] and "prayer" as [prEr], myself. Perhaps a better comparison would be "prayer" (person who prays), which is [pre@`] for me, compared with "prayer" (the noun) as [prEr].
Jim   Fri Jul 08, 2005 1:46 am GMT
I've read something that said the opposite. However, perhaps something else is going on. Perhaps the vowel in "vane" used to be a monophthong whereas that in "vain" & "vein" used to be a diphthong then they got merged (by most of us) to either. I'm just guessing here: taking my cue from spelling.
Smith   Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:16 am GMT
''Perhaps a better comparison would be "prayer" (person who prays), which is [pre@`] for me, compared with "prayer" (the noun) as [prEr].''

Kirk,

The ''prayer'' that's pronounced /preI.@`/ by me and the ''prayer'' that's pronounced /prEr/ by me, are both nouns. So ''prayer'' (person who prays) versus ''prayer'' (the noun) is not totally correct.
Jim   Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:07 pm GMT