International accent.

<<Yeah, it would sound very similar to the "Speak with Distinction" accent. Being rhotic with the vowel inventory you specify, I think it would still have an ambiguous "mid-Atlantic" feel.>>

One of the differences between my proposed accent and the "Speak with Distinction" accent, is that my proposed accent uses /Ar/ and /Or/ rather than /A@/ and /O@/ and makes the distinction between /@/ in "soda" and /@`/ in "better".

<<I've noticed that the RP "cot" vowel [Q] does sound a little different from my merged "cot-caught" phoneme, which is very open and could be transcribed as [Q:]. Based on this, I suppose I could at least attempt to manufacture a [Q]-[Q:] distinction.>>

You actually have a long vowel in "cot"?

Anyway, here are other details of my proposed international accent:

Retention of the distinctions between Mary-marry-merry, serious-Sirius, tory-torrent and hurry-furry /hVri/ - /f3`i/.

The accent also makes a distinction between the vowels in "fern", "fir" and "fur" like there is in Scottish Standard English by having /E`/ in "fern" and /I`/ in "fir" distinct from the /3`/ in "fur".

<<You actually have a long vowel in "cot"?>>

My vowel in "cot" is similar in quality to the short British [Q], but I think my "cot" vowel is longer than the RP one. One important thing to remember is that my "cot" vowel, unlike the RP "cot" vowel, is a free vowel (that is, it can end words - it's the exact same phoneme I use in "law").

So in other words, even though my [Q:] is qualitatively similar to RP [Q], I don't consider the two to be the same phoneme (because the one is free, while the other is checked). Rather, I would consider my [Q:] to be a descendant of historical [O:], which (in my dialect) swallowed up the [Q] phoneme and laxed down to [Q:].

<<The accent also makes a distinction between the vowels in "fern", "fir" and "fur" like there is in Scottish Standard English by having /E`/ in "fern" and /I`/ in "fir" distinct from the /3`/ in "fur".>>

I think that would just sound weird to most people's ears. Even the most conservative, old-fashioned General American and RP accents don't make those distinctions. Are you just trying to make a "maximally distinct" accent, which includes pretty much every phonemic distinction possible?

I don't think I could pull off your international accent, George. I'd have to break up my [3:(r)] in a three-way distinction and I'd be making wrong guesses all the time, even if the spelling helps.
The idea behind an international accent is that it won't sound too strange and that it will average the characteristics of the most widely spoken accents. This characteristic of Scottish English (and, as I understand it, not all Scottish English - the first nurse merger can be found in Edinburgh speech, correct me Damian if I'm wrong) has marginal status worldwide.

<<I think that would just sound weird to most people's ears. Even the most conservative, old-fashioned General American and RP accents don't make those distinctions. Are you just trying to make a "maximally distinct" accent, which includes pretty much every phonemic distinction possible?>>

Is this distinction really unique to Scotland? I'm from Jamaica and while "fir" and "fur" have the same vowel for me /f3`/, the vowel in "fern" is clearly different /fVn/.

>><<You actually have a long vowel in "cot"?>>

My vowel in "cot" is similar in quality to the short British [Q], but I think my "cot" vowel is longer than the RP one. One important thing to remember is that my "cot" vowel, unlike the RP "cot" vowel, is a free vowel (that is, it can end words - it's the exact same phoneme I use in "law").

So in other words, even though my [Q:] is qualitatively similar to RP [Q], I don't consider the two to be the same phoneme (because the one is free, while the other is checked). Rather, I would consider my [Q:] to be a descendant of historical [O:], which (in my dialect) swallowed up the [Q] phoneme and laxed down to [Q:].<<

I have a similar perception of my own [Q], whish is cognate with RP [O:] and not RP [Q] aside from certain cases like after historical /w/. It should be noted, though, that while not all too far from RP [Q] and rather far from RP [O:] (which I tend to almost perceive as /o/ often), I still subjectively perceive my own [Q] as being distinct from RP [Q]. Such is partly because RP [Q] seems to be somewhat lower and fronter than it, but also because RP [Q] comes off to me as "shorter" than it due to having a defined length, whereas /Q/ in isolation IMD has no defined length at all and is quite often realized as being specifically long, making it in general seem longer in comparison across the board. And, of course, all of this is aside from my [Q]

>><<The accent also makes a distinction between the vowels in "fern", "fir" and "fur" like there is in Scottish Standard English by having /E`/ in "fern" and /I`/ in "fir" distinct from the /3`/ in "fur".>>

I think that would just sound weird to most people's ears. Even the most conservative, old-fashioned General American and RP accents don't make those distinctions. Are you just trying to make a "maximally distinct" accent, which includes pretty much every phonemic distinction possible?<<

If I recall correctly, such was actually historically lost completely in English proper, but actually was reintroduced into it from Scots via the contact between Scots and English which resulted in modern Scottish English.

Even then, in my current thinking on orthographic reform, I myself am actually including this distinction (and leaving figuring out merged versus non-merged positions for historical /Er/, /Ir/, and /Vr/ (or /Ur/) to the reader due its presence in Standard Scottish English (despite its discontinuity with the Early New English said ideas are primarily based on). Where this merger occurred is predictable morphologically, and thus the reader *should* be able to figure out where it occurred without such being marked explicitly.

I love MARC WARREN on TV....currently in BBC1 series "Life on Mars...a police series about a Manchester police officer (detective) in 2006...he has an accident, injures his head, becomes unconscious, and when he comes round he finds himself in the Manchester of 1973 and finds he has to operate in the same City police force but using the "primitive" facilities and following the policies and practices they had 33 years ago.

Marc Warren is great and he's been in some really good films. He comes from Northampton, in the East Midlands of England, and apparently his accent is spot on for the Northampton area. Check it out on the following link - click on "Listen to Marc Warren etc....":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/hustle/danny_blue.shtml

I really like it - not bad for an English accent! Ha!

After listening to Marc Warren - on the same page while he is chatting away you will see the link to "LIfe on Mars". Click on this when Marc has finished and you will go to the Radio Five live chat in which Philip Glenister, who plays the Manchester copper, talks to presenter Simon Mayo about the series I mentioned in my last post.

Philip plays this Northern copper, with a reasonably authentic Northern (Manchester) accent - but in fact he is a Londoner - born and bred in Harrow, and the difference between his "Life on Mars" accent is quite different from his ordinary day to day accent - the one in the audio clip.

"Life on Mars" was on BBC1-TV this evening - very fast moving. And guess what - Marc Warren was in it too!

I can't wait to see the film "Hot Fuzz" - out o general UK release tomorrow 14 February - Valentine's Day.......red roses all round..... I am sending an imaginary one to LIZ........don't tell her it's from me......

<<Is this distinction really unique to Scotland? I'm from Jamaica and while "fir" and "fur" have the same vowel for me /f3`/, the vowel in "fern" is clearly different /fVn/.>>

Are FERN and FUN homophones for you, Megabox?

GABRIEL:

I missed seeing your earlier post - sorry about that. I have to admit to not reading all the way through this thread. My earlier posts really had no connection with what was being discussed. You guys are obviously much more well versed with phonetics, as such, than I am.

I would think that you are correct with what you say about the characteristics of the local accent here, especially the distinctions between those sounds in certain words such as those indicated. The Edinburgh accent in particular, like that of much of this part of Scotland ie the Borders region, were the first to be influenced by the development of English as the primary language in Scotland, and this has resulted in the shades of difference in accent and pronunciation between this area and other parts of Scotland.

Apologies again for my apparent lack of attention and courtesy.

No need to apologize, Damian. I admit I was puzzled by your posts, I even went back to earlier posts to see what could have elicited those comments. Then I just assumed you had posted those messages in the wrong thread, which is amusing. So, just to clarify now that you have joined us, do you have the same vowel sound in the words FIR, FUR and FERN?

OK GABRIEL - I'm glad I've been let off. No, not the wrong thread really - just me wandering completely off topic - I reckon my excuse was just something to do with accent, as I had in mind the great RP English English accent of my compatriot Ewan Macgregor in the film "Miss Potter" - the only reason I went to see this film - I go to see any film with that guy - the assumed accent a far cry from his native East Kilbride. I was also swayed off course by Life on Mars. I just love it.

Like me, E Mcg would use the same vowel sound in those three words you mention, even though he's not from Edinburgh itself. I've just been reciting them to myself (under my breath because I have colleagues nearby!) and yes......the same vowel sound. Additional info...the "R" is clearly rolled.

I'd say that an international accent would be the SWINE variant of American (Standard White Inland Northern English) but then, I'm American...

Maybe someone from Nigeria or India would disagree... I know most Europeans use English English...

<<I'd say that an international accent would be the SWINE variant of American (Standard White Inland Northern English)>>
I hope by Northern you don't mean areas with the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, because that is definitely not a candidate for an interational accent. I'm Canadian, and the LOT and PALM lexical sets in NCVS accents sounds to me like the TRAP set (eg. 'stock' sounds like 'stack'). I can't imagine the kind of trouble Scottish or northern English speakers, who have a more open and back realization of the TRAP set than I do, must have with this accent. If you're not referring to this area, then I disagree simply on the basis that for speakers outside of North America this is a recognizably foreign accent; the goal of an international accent is something acceptable to all (or most) English speakers as 'not foreign'.

Definitely not... SWINE refers to more like, Ohio and western Pennsylvania, but less so recently, more around the 60s and 70s. Definitely not Northern Cities Vowel Shift area... Definitely not...