Well, sure you might have /A/ when you're reading a list of a bunch of words in a formal reading voice. But I would imagine that you might pronounce them differently based on register, to whom you are speaking, enviroment of where those words are in a sentence, etc.
I have for them:
"father" ["fa:DR=:] < /"faD@r/
"bother" ["ba:DR=:] < /"baD@r/
"on" [a~:n] or [a~:] < /an/
"swan" [swA~:n], [swA~:], [swQ~:n], or [swQ~:] < /swAn/
"all" [Q:U] < /Ql/
"sorry" ["sO:Ri:] < /"sORi/
"wash" [wQS] < /wQS/
"saw" [SQ:] < /sQ/
"pop" [p_hap] < /pap/
"caught" [k_hQ?] < /kQt/
In my Massachusetts dialect, I have:
As you can see, I'm cot-caught merged but father-bother unmerged.
''But I would imagine that you might pronounce them differently based on register, to whom you are speaking, environment of where those words are in a sentence, etc.''
not really ;)
You guys all have vowels which are so much more uniform for historical /A:/, /Q/, and /O:/ than I do, I have to say (whereas mine are all over the place)... and that is even though I still have the same number of mergers here (albeit a different one) than Lazar and one less than Josh...
I am also from California, and I too have /A/ in all those words.