"dear" & "deer"

<<The r distorting the issue a little could be that prevents the diphthongisation standard in AmE>>

Don't final R's influence the preceding vowel for you, Felix? Even if you're non-rhotic, I would assume that you don't pronounce "they" and "there" identically. By the way, as far as I'm concerned, you can write in X-Sampa, IPA, or Babylonian cuneiform; it's all Greek to me....

>>Don't final R's influence the preceding vowel for you, Felix? Even if you're non-rhotic, I would assume that you don't pronounce "they" and "there" identically.<<

Well, no. I don't pronounce the R at all (unless a vowel follows), so there's nothing there to influence the preceding vowel! The way I think of it, the written R is just a feature of the orthography, like the way we often spell the "long o" sound with an A after the O, as in "boat". ("Parse" and "pass";* "sore" and "saw" are perfect homonyms for me, and I think of them no more differently than one might think of "team" and "teem". In fact, it's not uncommon to see an Australian writing "saw" when they meant "sore". After all, a sore can make you saw!) If I'm imitating an American accent and have nothing written to help me, you never know where I'd put in an extra R.

But still, I don't pronounce "they" and "there" identically, not at all. If I can't use the IPA to talk to you, then it's very difficulty to describe precisely the sounds I use. Basically, the vowel in "they" is a diphthong that starts from something like the "short a" TRAP sound of American English, and goes to the "long e" FLEECE sound. An American who wasn't expecting to hear an Australian talk would probably hear it sound something like a "long i" PRICE sound.

On the other hand, the sound I use in "there" doesn't really have an equivalent in American English. It's a bit like the Spanish "e" sound that sounds like a "long a" FACE sound to an American, except that it's longer. About one-and-a-half to two times as long as the "e" in the way I say "dress". It isn't at all a diphthong, though. (The way I say "dress" uses exactly the same vowel, except shorter.)

Still, the Rs that I *do* make (say, in between vowels) have a much less effect on the vowels than they do in many American accents. In this regard, the R behaves like any other sound; it influences the sound no more than a D would. I pronounce "merry", "mary" and "marry" all completely different (respectively, with my DRESS vowel, my SQUARE=there vowel, and my TRAP vowel); likewise, I pronounce "serious" and "Sirius" differently (the vowel in "serious" is 1.5 to 2 times as long, but is otherwise the sound). The length is quite important to the way I hear the vowels, evidently (a point I emphasise because in many American accents, vowel lengths vary, but not in a way that makes a difference to Americans perceptions of the words; conversely, Americans are more attuned to differences in the actual sounds than I am).

(If I could talk IPA to you, I would simply say that I use /æi/ and /e:/, noting that /æi/ is actually almost [ai], but /e:/ is indeed true [e:], using cardinal vowel sounds. But that's probably still Greek to you, so just pretend I never wrote this paragraph.)

I hope this is clear and answers your question!

* Regarding "parse" vs "pass", like the formal British Received Pronunciation I use a vowel that sounds a bit like the American "short o" LOT sound in words like "pass", "bath", "laugh".

>>Depends on just what North American English dialect one is speaking of, since a good number of dialects, such as mine and Kirk's, have monophthongized tense vowels, including /e/ and /o/, in most positions, with [eI] and [oU] just turning into relatively limited allophones of such.<<

As I said, one of the foreign standards: General American as heard on TV. Most of the time an Australian would hear an American is, of course, on TV.

There are some dialects which do, as you say, use a pure, short [e], rather than a diphthongised or lengthened sound. These do, indeed, sound to me like the vowel in "dress". Similarly, a pure, short [i] does indeed sound to me like the vowel in "kit". Context is usually enough to work out what they mean. I doubt anyone would ever want me to ask a pit (for Pete) why "he's" let (for late)! When it's not: well, misunderstandings are inevitable. That's why if an American moves to Australia, they'll (subconciously) incorporate some features of an Australian accent into their own speech (and vice versa).

<<>>Depends on just what North American English dialect one is speaking of, since a good number of dialects, such as mine and Kirk's, have monophthongized tense vowels, including /e/ and /o/, in most positions, with [eI] and [oU] just turning into relatively limited allophones of such.<<

As I said, one of the foreign standards: General American as heard on TV. Most of the time an Australian would hear an American is, of course, on TV.>>

Yeah, actually it's become relatively common in North American English to monophthongize /e/ and /o/ in most positions. I can really only diphthongize those if they're in open-syllable position followed by a pause. Still [e] and [o] aren't accurate narrow transcriptions of them, since my [e] is not as tense as cardinal [e] while still being monophthongal. Similarly, my [o] has little lip rounding and may be somewhat centralized.

<<There are some dialects which do, as you say, use a pure, short [e], rather than a diphthongised or lengthened sound. These do, indeed, sound to me like the vowel in "dress". Similarly, a pure, short [i] does indeed sound to me like the vowel in "kit".>>

When I hear that it definitely sounds Australian :) The AusE vowel in "sit" sounds very similar to my "seat." As you mention, in context it makes sense and once your brain calibrates to the other person's vowels, it's not hard to understand. Still, if you're not expecting the accent then comprehension can be hampered for a few seconds. I used to work at a smoothie place (Jamba Juice) and each customer's name had to be taken so we could call it out when their smoothie was ready and I remember one time a British woman ordered and at first said her name was what sounded like "Collie" to me, but I realized it was probably "Karly." When I resaid it in my rhotic accent she seemed to nod in approval so I must've guessed right.

Guest Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:54 am GMT
<<The r distorting the issue a little could be that prevents the diphthongisation standard in AmE>>

Don't final R's influence the preceding vowel for you, Felix? Even if you're non-rhotic, I would assume that you don't pronounce "they" and "there" identically. By the way, as far as I'm concerned, you can write in X-Sampa, IPA, or Babylonian cuneiform; it's all Greek to me....

Sorry, that was me, forgot to put my name on it.

Thanks for the reply. I heard an Australian saying "there" and that was what prompted me to ask. It was an interesting pronunciation.

For me (an Aussie) "deer" and "dear" are homophones.

"There" does not rhyme with "they".

dear/deer = [dI:] or [dI@]
there = [De:] or [De@]
they = [D{I]

<<Yeah, actually it's become relatively common in North American English to monophthongize /e/ and /o/ in most positions. I can really only diphthongize those if they're in open-syllable position followed by a pause. Still [e] and [o] aren't accurate narrow transcriptions of them, since my [e] is not as tense as cardinal [e] while still being monophthongal. Similarly, my [o] has little lip rounding and may be somewhat centralized.>>

In my dialect, /e/ and /o/ are diphthongs ([eI] and [oU]) in all positions. I think the monophthongization would be less common here on the East Coast.

<<In my dialect, /e/ and /o/ are diphthongs ([eI] and [oU]) in all positions. I think the monophthongization would be less common here on the East Coast.>>

Yeah, I knew it didn't show up in a lot of regions. I've noticed your transcriptions of those sounds were always diphthongal while Travis' and mine are usually monophthongal (sometimes I'll indicate the offliglide in parentheses if it's optional). For me:

"bait" [bet] not *[beIt]
"bay" [be(I)]

"most" [mo_cst] not *[moUst]
"mow" [mo(U)]

Why not transcribe dear and deer as [dir]?

<<Why not transcribe dear and deer as [dir]?>>

I wouldn't transcribe it that way for representing my speech because that's not how I pronounce it :) I pronounce it [dIr\]. Do you pronounce it [dir\]?

<<Do you pronounce it [dir\]?>>
I don't know what the slash after /r/ represents, but yes. I remember having a discussion on antimoon about deer, near, sear, beer, etc. types of words.

<<
<<Deer and dear are pronounced the same for me, but the vowels in deer and pit are not.>>

Interesting... On a related note, how would you describe the vowel you use in "Mary/merry/marry"? Is it the same as the vowel in "bet", or do "Mary/merry/marry" and "bet" have different vowels in the same way that the "deer" and "pit" have different vowels?
>>

The vowels in deer and pit are different for me, too. What's interesting about that? I thought that was Standard American English. I don't have the Mary/merry/marry merger.

I think I can get either one or two syllables out of "deer", depending on whether it's stressed or unstressed in the sentence. I would use one syllable in saying "They went hunting and came back with two deer and an elk" but two if I were saying "two elk and a deer". Or at least I would hold the vowel longer than in the first example.

<<I don't know what the slash after /r/ represents, but yes. I remember having a discussion on antimoon about deer, near, sear, beer, etc. types of words.>>

In X-SAMPA [r\] is an alveolar approximant, which is more or less the English "r." If you're transcribing on phonetic level [r\] is more accurate, while /r/ will do fine for the phonemic level, but since you used brackets instead of slashes, more phonetic detail is best.

<<Interesting... On a related note, how would you describe the vowel you use in "Mary/merry/marry"? Is it the same as the vowel in "bet", or do "Mary/merry/marry" and "bet" have different vowels in the same way that the "deer" and "pit" have different vowels?>>

I have the same vowel in "Mary/marry/merry" because all my pre-rhotic vowels are lax (except for [A]). I pronounce those all ["mEr\i], which is the vowel I have in "bet" [bEt]. Look at my pronunciations for the following words:

"bait/bate" [bet]
"bet" [bEt]
"bear/bare" [bEr\]

"beet/beat" [bit]
"bit" [bIt]
"beer" [bIr\]

"matey" ["me4i]
"matty" [s{t]
"messy" ["mEsi]
"Mary/marry/merry" ["mEr\i]


<<I thought that was Standard American English.>>

"Standard" American English is actually pretty vaguely defined :) Also, even if it were, no one would speak completely "standard" anyway.

<<I don't have the Mary/merry/marry merger.>>

That's interesting. Do you have two or three separate pronunciations for those?

Sorry, above that should be:

"Also, even if it weren't" instead of "even if it were"

Also, "matty" should be ["m{4i], not "sat" (I changed my mind about examples but forgot to change the transcription).