Yeah, when you posted audio clips of your speech before, Travis, I could tell there were some elements of the NCVS in it, even if it wasn't the most exaggerated example of it. I wouldn't necessarily have been able to tell exactly where you were from but I would've guessed somewhere from the Northern Midwest.
Accent with the strangest vowel sounds
The main thing that is interesting in my case though is that the chain skipped over /O/, and there was no lowering at all of /o/. Classically, the NCVS has been caused by a raising of /{/, which is present here. However, though, the chain has seemed to have gone a different *path* than the classical case. Classically, the chain goes around, back, down, and forwards, pushing /e/ upwards (and potentially diphthongizing it in the process). This would entail the lowering of both /o/ and /O/, which are present in instances of classical NCVS, in order to push /A/ forward, as shown by the realization of /O/ as [A] or like in dialects with such.
However, in my dialect's case, it seems like a very similar, but essentially quite different path is taken. In my case, /e/ seems unaffected, and /o/ is pushed back and *up*, not down; /O/ in turn is simply not affected, as it is not being pushed down by /o/. So how is /A/ then shifted forwards at all, if it is not being *pushed* by /O/? My guess is that the raising of /{/ essentially gave /A/ more room to shift around, due to /{/ becoming more of a middle vowel rather than a low vowel, and hence allowing /A/ to drift forward without reducing overall vowel distinctions. This would also explain that while /A/ does shift forward in this dialect, its original position of [A] is still conserved, as /O/ has not been pushed towards towards [A] at all. This still does not explain why "yah" uses [a] exclusively, but my guess would be that it is probably a loanword, which used [a] to start with.
However, in my dialect's case, it seems like a very similar, but essentially quite different path is taken. In my case, /e/ seems unaffected, and /o/ is pushed back and *up*, not down; /O/ in turn is simply not affected, as it is not being pushed down by /o/. So how is /A/ then shifted forwards at all, if it is not being *pushed* by /O/? My guess is that the raising of /{/ essentially gave /A/ more room to shift around, due to /{/ becoming more of a middle vowel rather than a low vowel, and hence allowing /A/ to drift forward without reducing overall vowel distinctions. This would also explain that while /A/ does shift forward in this dialect, its original position of [A] is still conserved, as /O/ has not been pushed towards towards [A] at all. This still does not explain why "yah" uses [a] exclusively, but my guess would be that it is probably a loanword, which used [a] to start with.
Oh, that's an interesting situation you have Travis, and I think you're right on--everything you said makes sense as to why yours is different than the normal NCVS pattern. I think there are several different submodels of the NVCS, and your dialect is probably one of them.
<<This still does not explain why "yah" uses [a] exclusively, but my guess would be that it is probably a loanword, which used [a] to start with.>>
My "yeah" follows the regular rules of the CVS, as it may often be [ja], but is [j{] in a more traditional position for me. According to the regular chain shifts you and I should not both have [a] for "yeah" so yours must be a loanword example as mine does follow the regular GenAm --> CVS rules of [{] --> [a].
<<This still does not explain why "yah" uses [a] exclusively, but my guess would be that it is probably a loanword, which used [a] to start with.>>
My "yeah" follows the regular rules of the CVS, as it may often be [ja], but is [j{] in a more traditional position for me. According to the regular chain shifts you and I should not both have [a] for "yeah" so yours must be a loanword example as mine does follow the regular GenAm --> CVS rules of [{] --> [a].
Kirk, the matter is that I have both "yeah" and "yah" in parallel to each other, the former being [j{] approaching [jE], the latter being [ja] (and NOT [jA]). This is the part that in particular points to such being a loanword is that it exists in parallel to an existing equivalent English word in addition to being phonologically anomalous (because there is normally no phonemic specific /a/ distinct from /A/ in NAE dialects). That combined with that it is pronounced practically identically with an equivalent word in a language formerly spoken in the area I am from.
Yeah that makes sense, then. The former one ([j{] approaching [jE]) is genetically related to my [j{] approaching [ja], while the latter does make sense as a non-English derived word.
I always pronounce "yeah" as [j{]. It's really the only instance in my speech of [{] occurring word-finally, as opposed to [A] and [Q], which occur quite a bit word-finally.
<<Where in the Caribbean are you from, Robert?>>
American Nic, I'm from Jamaica. There tends to be an intrusive ''y'' sound in certain words in my accent, such as ''car'' which is pronounced by me as /kja:r/ ''cyar''. I think this pronunciation of ''car'' is unique to Caribbean accents.
American Nic, I'm from Jamaica. There tends to be an intrusive ''y'' sound in certain words in my accent, such as ''car'' which is pronounced by me as /kja:r/ ''cyar''. I think this pronunciation of ''car'' is unique to Caribbean accents.
Robert, I thought I heard somewhere once that the y-sound can signify a change in meaning as well, as in can = can, but cyan = can't. Is this true?
<<Robert, I thought I heard somewhere once that the y-sound can signify a change in meaning as well, as in can = can, but cyan = can't. Is this true?>>
Yes, I pronounce ''can'' as /kan/ and ''can't'' as /kjan/.
Yes, I pronounce ''can'' as /kan/ and ''can't'' as /kjan/.
<<Robert, I thought I heard somewhere once that the y-sound can signify a change in meaning as well, as in can = can, but cyan = can't. Is this true?>>
Yes, I pronounce ''can'' as /kan/ and ''can't'' as /kjan/ ''kyan''.
Yes, I pronounce ''can'' as /kan/ and ''can't'' as /kjan/ ''kyan''.
No problem! Thanks for the info. Are there other words where you do that?
Ever since I joined the Air Force on 29 March I've been hearing plenty of different accents every day. When I was in Basic Training in the spring about half of our flight had a southern accent. (there were 40 of us total) There was someone from Boston and he was easily nicknamed "Boston" because of his easily noticeable accent. Then there were two from Wisconsin who had the NCVS...
Since I got to DLI (the Defense Language Institute) I've met more people with the NCVS than I ever have before. My first roommate here had a really advanced Shift and he was from Michigan. I've also met people from Binghamton, NY, Detroit and Chicago with it. My second roommate was from Horicon, Wisconsin and didn't have it; however, he did noticably have Canadian Raising. My current roommate grew up in southern California and doesn't distinguish pen from pin. He doesn't seem to have that California Shift, though, at least not a very advanced version of it.
And speaking of the California Shift, is it one of those things that expands outwards from cities? I haven't noticed it at all around Monterey.
And before I go, some people were talking about Canada. Has anyone heard of the Canadian Shift? Apparently it's very similar to the one in California. You can read about it here: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/Atlas_chapters/Ch15_2nd.rev.pdf
Since I got to DLI (the Defense Language Institute) I've met more people with the NCVS than I ever have before. My first roommate here had a really advanced Shift and he was from Michigan. I've also met people from Binghamton, NY, Detroit and Chicago with it. My second roommate was from Horicon, Wisconsin and didn't have it; however, he did noticably have Canadian Raising. My current roommate grew up in southern California and doesn't distinguish pen from pin. He doesn't seem to have that California Shift, though, at least not a very advanced version of it.
And speaking of the California Shift, is it one of those things that expands outwards from cities? I haven't noticed it at all around Monterey.
And before I go, some people were talking about Canada. Has anyone heard of the Canadian Shift? Apparently it's very similar to the one in California. You can read about it here: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/Atlas_chapters/Ch15_2nd.rev.pdf
<<My current roommate grew up in southern California and doesn't distinguish pen from pin.>>
That's interesting. I invariably distinguish the two, and most people I know here do, too. However, I did have a professor last year who was a so-cal native who appeared to have the pen-pin merger, but it stuck out in my mind as different.
<<And speaking of the California Shift, is it one of those things that expands outwards from cities? I haven't noticed it at all around Monterey.>>
I believe it's most strongest in the two largest urban metro areas in California, the San Francisco-San Jose Bay Area as well as the nearby Sacramento Area and the areas in between the two, and the Los Angeles-Orange County-San Diego-Inland Empire area.
Where I grew up was in a city called Turlock, in California's large central San Joaquin Valley, about an hour south of Sacramento and less than an hour east of the SF Bay Area, so my town has been/is heavily influenced by those areas (people moving there from those urban areas, or commuting there or going to school in those areas or moving there and then returning after a few years, etc etc). I've heard very progressive CVS speakers from areas as diverse as the outermost suburbs of Sacramento, the SF Bay Area, my town, and So-Cal. One of the most progressive CVS speakers I know is my friend from Turlock--the CVS is nearly complete for her. "bit" is [bEt], "bet" is almost always full-on [b{t] for her, "bat" is [bat], "bot" is [bOt], etc. I do have some of those features in my speech but not always to the same extreme, as my speech can shift between being quite progressive along the CVS and being more traditional with my vowels, and this all happens on a mostly unconscious level until I catch myself saying something one way or another.
There is a high degree of mobility thruout the state between the major urban areas so that isn't too surprising, even tho some of those areas are over 500-600 miles away from each other. Monterey isn't really in the SF Bay Area but it's in its sphere of influence, so I would expect there'd be at least some features of the CVS in the speech there, at least amongst natives or longtime residents. Also, as the CVS is a relatively young shift, the most progressive speakers are almost always young--I've heard few progressive CVS speakers over 40.
That's interesting. I invariably distinguish the two, and most people I know here do, too. However, I did have a professor last year who was a so-cal native who appeared to have the pen-pin merger, but it stuck out in my mind as different.
<<And speaking of the California Shift, is it one of those things that expands outwards from cities? I haven't noticed it at all around Monterey.>>
I believe it's most strongest in the two largest urban metro areas in California, the San Francisco-San Jose Bay Area as well as the nearby Sacramento Area and the areas in between the two, and the Los Angeles-Orange County-San Diego-Inland Empire area.
Where I grew up was in a city called Turlock, in California's large central San Joaquin Valley, about an hour south of Sacramento and less than an hour east of the SF Bay Area, so my town has been/is heavily influenced by those areas (people moving there from those urban areas, or commuting there or going to school in those areas or moving there and then returning after a few years, etc etc). I've heard very progressive CVS speakers from areas as diverse as the outermost suburbs of Sacramento, the SF Bay Area, my town, and So-Cal. One of the most progressive CVS speakers I know is my friend from Turlock--the CVS is nearly complete for her. "bit" is [bEt], "bet" is almost always full-on [b{t] for her, "bat" is [bat], "bot" is [bOt], etc. I do have some of those features in my speech but not always to the same extreme, as my speech can shift between being quite progressive along the CVS and being more traditional with my vowels, and this all happens on a mostly unconscious level until I catch myself saying something one way or another.
There is a high degree of mobility thruout the state between the major urban areas so that isn't too surprising, even tho some of those areas are over 500-600 miles away from each other. Monterey isn't really in the SF Bay Area but it's in its sphere of influence, so I would expect there'd be at least some features of the CVS in the speech there, at least amongst natives or longtime residents. Also, as the CVS is a relatively young shift, the most progressive speakers are almost always young--I've heard few progressive CVS speakers over 40.
I have to agree that for me the strangest accent as a whole has got to be the Scottish accent, simply because we don't hear it very often. The Australian and New Zeeland accents are also pretty strange, but we inherited a lot of their pronunciations so it isn't all that weird to my ears.
For other people, our accent, (South African), are also pretty strange, simply because there are a lot of factors that have influenced it, local languages, both British and American English, as well as other Southern countries like Australia and New Zeeland, all of this giving us a pretty exotic sounding accent.
For other people, our accent, (South African), are also pretty strange, simply because there are a lot of factors that have influenced it, local languages, both British and American English, as well as other Southern countries like Australia and New Zeeland, all of this giving us a pretty exotic sounding accent.