How can I eliminate my cot-caught merger?

Sam   Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:55 pm GMT
I'm trying to eliminate my cot-caught merger. How do I determine which words are supposed to be 'ah', and which are supposed to be 'aw'?
Kirk   Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:57 pm GMT
Why would you ever want to get rid of it in the first place? Also, are you a native or nonnative speaker?
Sam   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:00 pm GMT
I am a native speaker, but I'm interested in learning how to speak neutral American English.
SpaceFlight   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:04 pm GMT
<<I'm trying to eliminate my cot-caught merger. How do I determine which words are supposed to be 'ah', and which are supposed to be 'aw'?>>

The simple answer is that you don't need to eliminate it.
Lazar   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:05 pm GMT
Over 40 percent of Americans have the cot-caught merger, and I've never heard of it being deprecated. I'd advise you not to try to change the way you speak.
Sam   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:06 pm GMT
But if I don't eliminate it, people will detect that I have an accent.
SpaceFlight   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:06 pm GMT
<<I am a native speaker, but I'm interested in learning how to speak neutral American English.>>

You're speech can still sound neutral even with the cot-caught merger. I have the cot-caught merger and my speech is not preceived as not being neutral.
SpaceFlight   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:07 pm GMT
<<preceived>>

perceived
Lazar   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:14 pm GMT
<<But if I don't eliminate it, people will detect that I have an accent.>>

Not to be a pedant, but "neutral American English" would be an accent as well...you're talking about a "regional accent".

And the cot-caught merger wouldn't lend you a regional accent anyway - it's so widespread (>40%) that it has very little perceived regional character.
Kirk   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:15 pm GMT
<<I am a native speaker, but I'm interested in learning how to speak neutral American English.>>

There is no perfect "neutral" as everyone grew up somewhere and as native speakers acquired the language thru natural means. The "cot-caught" merger is rarely stigmatized whether you have it or don't, and 40-50% of Americans have it. If you flip on the tv you'll notice many "c-c" merged people who are in some of the most publicly prestigious positions as news broadcasters, journalists, actors, etc. There are also many nonmerged "c-c" people in those positions. However, few Americans really pay a great deal of attention to this phenomenon. If people are likely to notice something about your speech, chances are they'll notice other things, as the "c-c" merger doesn't register big on the radar screen of most Americans uninitiated in phonetics and/or North American dialectology.
Guest   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:16 pm GMT
But isn't neutral supposed to be non-regional sounding English? People with the cot-caught merger sound like they are from somewhere else.
Guest   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:17 pm GMT
<<And the cot-caught merger wouldn't lend you a regional accent anyway - it's so widespread (>40%) that it has very little perceived regional character.>>

Exactly. You can find "c-c" merged people all thruout North America. Almost the entire West has it, almost all Canadians have it, many Midwestern and some Eastern dialects have it, Florida has it, as well as many other pockets even in areas where the merger isn't as common. It's clear that it's not associated with any one region as it may be found all over the place and
SpaceFlight   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:17 pm GMT
<<But isn't neutral supposed to be non-regional sounding English? People with the cot-caught merger sound like they are from somewhere else.>>

The same can be said about people who don't have the cot-caught merger that live in places that have it.
Kirk   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:18 pm GMT
Oops...accidentally hit send before I was done. That previous message was mine.
Lazar   Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:19 pm GMT
<<People with the cot-caught merger sound like they are from somewhere else.>>

Huh? We're talking about perhaps 45% of the country.

And remember that Hollywood is located in the heart of c-c unmerged territory.