JP   Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:49 pm GMT
I can't imagine saying "palm," "calm," or "almond" without the /l/, and I've never heard these words pronounced any other way.

Similarly, in my variety "film" and "kiln" retain their /l/ sounds; about the only word I can think of where I don't insert the /l/ sound is "salmon."

Out of curiosity, what variety of English would you call this?
Travis   Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:51 pm GMT
>><<Just curious, Josh Lalonde, was that a typo or do you really pronounce it that way? The "l" key is close to the "o" key which is why I'm asking.>>

No, it's not a typo. I have a process called l-vocalisation that changes historic /l/ into a vowel in certain situations. The actual realization is somewhere between [U] and [o], but I think [o] is more accurate, and also avoids confusion with /U/, which for me is unrounded and central, something like [I\], whereas my vocalized /l/ is fully back and rounded.<<

When I transcribe [U] for my /l/ it actually is fully backed and rounded, as I actually mean [U] proper not not that which is often transcribed as such in English dialects, whereas my /U/ tends to be at least somewhat centralized in nature, and in formal speech is normally just [U_+] but can at times become [}] in very unstressed words. However, though, I only have rounded realizations of /l/ after rounded vowels or in the case of /l/ following a reduced vowel following /w/.
Travis   Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:54 pm GMT
(Well, sometimes the [U] from /l/ is a bit less rounded than, say, [o] in my dialect, particularly in more careful speech, but it is still more rounded than, say, [Q].)
Guest   Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:20 am GMT
I don't think I have ever used the word "kiln" in a sentence. I would not eliminate the "n".

As for film, that is [fIlm]. Calm is [kam], palm is [pam], but the first part of almond is [Qm].
Milton   Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:51 pm GMT
Palm Beach [pA:m bi:tS]
Long Beach [lAnG bi:tS]
Jim H.   Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:59 pm GMT
I pronounce "whorl" as [W3`.=5]. How do others pronounce it?
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:36 am GMT
<<I don't recall ever using this word, but I would say ['wO`o].>>

Such would sound weird to me. Where are you from?
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:42 am GMT
On a related question, what about "wet" and "whet"? For me the "w" is voiced in "wet" [wEt] and unvoiced in "whet" [WEt].
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:15 am GMT
<<I'm from Ottawa, Canada, but I don't think my realizations of /l/ and /r/ are 'normal' for this area. They seem to be more common for younger people, so maybe it is a developing trend. As for 'wet' and 'whet', they are the same for me. Older people around here do make the distinction, as do some English teachers or others who are trying to speak 'correctly', but most people don't.>>

I'm from Alabama. I tend to insert an [r\] in "wash" which comes out as something like "warsh" [wOr\S]. Likewise, "washington" is [wOr\SInt@n]. I have no idea where this comes from.
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:24 am GMT
What seems really odd about this [wOr\S] thing for "wash" to me, is that not only is a [r\] inserted, but also the vowel is altered. "wash" without the [r\] tends to be [wAS].
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:42 am GMT
Is Ottawa pronounced [A4.@.w@]?
Travis   Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:46 am GMT
I myself have ["wR=:M:] for "whorl", for the record.
Jim H.   Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:57 am GMT
<<I myself have ["wR=:M:] for "whorl", for the record.>>

You wouldn't happen to be from the Upper Midwest, would you?
Lazar   Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:34 am GMT
I've been wondering about the pronunciation of Ottawa as well. Is it more common in Canada to hear ["Q4@w@]/["A4@w@] or ["Q4@wQ]/["A4@wA]?
Travis   Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:08 am GMT
>>You wouldn't happen to be from the Upper Midwest, would you?<<

I most definitely am from the Upper Midwest, I have to say.