So, are we talking modified Valley-Girl in CA these days, Kirk? I never understood any of that IPA/Xsampa stuff, but now that you spell it out in plain English, it all becomes (chillingly) clear....
slot vs slut
<<but now that you spell it out in plain English, it all becomes (chillingly) clear....>>
Ya, thot makes et a lawt batter, doesn't et?
Ya, thot makes et a lawt batter, doesn't et?
<<So, are we talking modified Valley-Girl in CA these days, Kirk? I never understood any of that IPA/Xsampa stuff, but now that you spell it out in plain English, it all becomes (chillingly) clear....>>
Well my point was that spelling using the Roman alphabet doesn't really make it clear. For instance, "thot" implies it's pronounced [DAt] (to rhyme with GenAm "hot," which it doesn't). It's actually [Dat] in the CVS, but [a] can't be represented by English orthography. The same could be said for most of the other spellings. Just as Canadians don't really say "aboot" (there is a different vowel there but not "oo" /u/) Californians don't say "thot" but it's a jocular spelling.
Some of the features of the CVS may be present in what is thought of as Valley Girl speech but I've listened to old 80s clips of Valley Girl speech and it doesn't have several of the features associated with the CVS which has been spreading around the state. I've heard CVS-influenced speech in everyone--males, females (I believe the pattern may be slightly different for males than females, and females tend to be most progressive), people from Sacramento, from the Bay Area, from San Diego, etc. and they don't sound like Valley Girls to me.
Well my point was that spelling using the Roman alphabet doesn't really make it clear. For instance, "thot" implies it's pronounced [DAt] (to rhyme with GenAm "hot," which it doesn't). It's actually [Dat] in the CVS, but [a] can't be represented by English orthography. The same could be said for most of the other spellings. Just as Canadians don't really say "aboot" (there is a different vowel there but not "oo" /u/) Californians don't say "thot" but it's a jocular spelling.
Some of the features of the CVS may be present in what is thought of as Valley Girl speech but I've listened to old 80s clips of Valley Girl speech and it doesn't have several of the features associated with the CVS which has been spreading around the state. I've heard CVS-influenced speech in everyone--males, females (I believe the pattern may be slightly different for males than females, and females tend to be most progressive), people from Sacramento, from the Bay Area, from San Diego, etc. and they don't sound like Valley Girls to me.
The original Valspeak was pretty exaggerated, wasn't it? I can't not picture Moon Zappa saying, "Ah'm a Val, ah knao, but ah come from, like, a rilly gud parrt of Encinow, so it's okai. What? What's the matter with the wai ah tawk? Ah do NOT tawk funny -- ah'm shurrr!"
What I'm reading here sounds more like Valley-Girl Lite. Just half the calories! -- and not nearly as obnoxious.
What I'm reading here sounds more like Valley-Girl Lite. Just half the calories! -- and not nearly as obnoxious.
<<What I'm reading here sounds more like Valley-Girl Lite. Just half the calories! -- and not nearly as obnoxious.>>
Haha, a funny way to put it :) But, yeah, it's still different than Valley Girl--in some ways the CVS moves consistently in directions not present in Valley Girl speech. For instance, in Valley Girl speech [E] is not lowered to [{] (remember, the vowel in GenAm "cat"), but it is in the CVS. Also, as with the Northern Cities Vowel shift and Northern Citiers, the CVS is rarely noticed by Californians (no matter how progressive they or those around them are along the chain shift), while Valspeak was so peripheral even in California that it stood out to non-Valspeak Californians (which was most of the population). That's what separates a true widespread chainshift from a decade-long fad (yet one which probably had some of the primitive prototype CVS features by virtue of being in California--I don't think it was the other way around, that Valspeak became "light" and became widespread).
Haha, a funny way to put it :) But, yeah, it's still different than Valley Girl--in some ways the CVS moves consistently in directions not present in Valley Girl speech. For instance, in Valley Girl speech [E] is not lowered to [{] (remember, the vowel in GenAm "cat"), but it is in the CVS. Also, as with the Northern Cities Vowel shift and Northern Citiers, the CVS is rarely noticed by Californians (no matter how progressive they or those around them are along the chain shift), while Valspeak was so peripheral even in California that it stood out to non-Valspeak Californians (which was most of the population). That's what separates a true widespread chainshift from a decade-long fad (yet one which probably had some of the primitive prototype CVS features by virtue of being in California--I don't think it was the other way around, that Valspeak became "light" and became widespread).
Yeah, /säm/ would be X-SAMPA /s6m/ I just used the /ä/ to tie in with the previous posts but stuck the dots on top to remind us that it's a central not a front vowel.
And, yep, /6/ sounds different to /6:/, you guessed it, because of my good ol' phonemic vowel length.
And, yep, /6/ sounds different to /6:/, you guessed it, because of my good ol' phonemic vowel length.
I don't think I've actually ever said the word "psalm" out loud. I think in my head I'm tempted to pronounce the L.
<<I don't think I've actually ever said the word "psalm" out loud. I think in my head I'm tempted to pronounce the L.>>
I say it /sAm/. If "som" were a word it would rhyme with that.
I say it /sAm/. If "som" were a word it would rhyme with that.
What I noticed in Californian accent: they pronounce talk as [ta:k], but dollar sounds more like [dOl@r] than like [da:l@r]...And many Californians pronounce MOM like [MOm] (=mawm in General American)...
Mawm, this is ahsome :) (California)
Mam, this is ahsome :) (Detroit)
Mahm, this is awesome :) (NYC)
Mam, this is ahsome :) (Detroit)
Mahm, this is awesome :) (NYC)
<<What I noticed in Californian accent: they pronounce talk as [ta:k], but dollar sounds more like [dOl@r] than like [da:l@r]...And many Californians pronounce MOM like [MOm] (=mawm in General American)...>>
It depends on who you're talking to, but what you've noticed is part of the California Vowel Shift. General American [A] (which encompasses "cot" and "caught" as Californian English has already been "c-c" merged) moves towards the direction of [O] in the California Vowel Shift. It may not be full-on [O] but it may be approaching it, and speakers vary the degree that they do it to. I say anything from [A] to [O] for those words, but it's usually closer to [A] or halfway to [O] for me.
<<is it a lawst dawg thang?>>
Hehe. It's also relatively common to say "thang" here, which is pronounced not [T{N] but [TeN] because many Californians (including me) have front-vowel raising before velar nasal [N]. I would say [TeN] "thang" and [TiN] "thing" (not [TIN] by the same rules) are interchangeable for me.
It depends on who you're talking to, but what you've noticed is part of the California Vowel Shift. General American [A] (which encompasses "cot" and "caught" as Californian English has already been "c-c" merged) moves towards the direction of [O] in the California Vowel Shift. It may not be full-on [O] but it may be approaching it, and speakers vary the degree that they do it to. I say anything from [A] to [O] for those words, but it's usually closer to [A] or halfway to [O] for me.
<<is it a lawst dawg thang?>>
Hehe. It's also relatively common to say "thang" here, which is pronounced not [T{N] but [TeN] because many Californians (including me) have front-vowel raising before velar nasal [N]. I would say [TeN] "thang" and [TiN] "thing" (not [TIN] by the same rules) are interchangeable for me.