العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolPHONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF ENGLISH HIGH BACK VOWELS
(Redirected from Phonological history of the high back vowels)
Most dialects of modern English have two 'high back vowels': the close back rounded vowel found in words like ''goose'', and the near-close near-back rounded vowel found in words like ''foot''. This article discusses the history of these vowels in various dialects of English, focusing in particular on phonemic splits and mergers involving these sounds.
The 'foot-goose merger' is a phenomenon that occurs in Scottish English, Ulster varieties of Hiberno-English, Malaysian English and Singaporean English, [1] where the vowels and are merged. As a result, pairs like ''look''/''Luke'' are homophones and ''good''/''food'' and ''foot''/''boot'' rhyme. The merged vowel is usually or in Scottish English and in Singaporean English.[2] The use of the same vowel in "foot" and "goose" in these dialects is not due to phonemic merger, but the appliance of a different languages vowel system to the English lexical incidence [3]. The full-fool merger is a conditioned merger of the same two vowels before /l/, making pairs like ''pull''/''pool'' and ''full''/''fool'' homophones.
The 'foot-strut split' is the split of Middle English into two distinct phonemes (as in ''foot'') and (as in ''strut'') that occurs in most varieties of English; the most notable exception is Northern England and the English Midlands.[4]
The origin of the split is the unrounding of in Early Modern English, resulting in the phoneme . In general (though with some exceptions), this unrounding did not occur if was preceded by a labial consonant (e.g., , , ) and followed by , , or , leaving the modern . Because of the inconsistency of the split, the words ''put'' and ''putt'' became a minimal pair, distinguished as and .
In non-splitting accents, ''cut'' and ''put'' rhyme, ''putt'' and ''put'' are homophonous as , and ''pudding'' and ''budding'' rhyme. However ''luck'' and ''look'' are not necessarily homophones; many accents in the area concerned have ''look'' as , with the vowel of ''goose''.
The absence of this split is a less common feature of educated Northern English speech than the absence of the trap-bath split.[5] The absence of the foot-strut split is sometimes stigmatized, and speakers of non-splitting accents often try to introduce it into their speech, sometimes resulting in hypercorrections such as pronouncing ''pudding'' .
The name "foot-strut split" refers to the lexical sets introduced by Wells (1982), and identifies the vowel phonemes in the words, though that name may be a bit misleading as the word ''foot'' itself may have had a different vowel from ''put'' at the time the split occurred and so did not participate in the split.
Middle English distinguished the close front rounded vowel (occurring in loanwords from Anglo-Norman like ''duke'') and the diphthongs (occurring in words like ''new'') and (occurring in words like ''few'').[6]
By Early Modern English, these three vowels merged as , which has remained as such in some Welsh, northern English, and American accents in which ''through'' is distinct from ''threw'' .[7] In the majority of accents, however, later became , which, depending on the preceding consonant, either remained or developed into by the process of yod-dropping, hence the present pronunciations , , and .
Middle English was commonly represented the spellings ''uCe'' and ''ue'' as in ''duke'' and ''hue'', while and were commonly represented by the spellings ''ew'' and ''eu'' as in ''dew''.
In a handful words, including some very common ones, the vowel was shortened to . In a few of these words, notably ''blood'' and ''flood'', this shortening happened early enough that the resulting underwent the "foot-strut split" and are now pronounced with . Other words that underwent shortening later consistently have , such as ''good'', ''book'', and ''wool''. Still other words, such as ''roof'', ''hoof'', and ''root'' are in the process of the shift today, with some speakers preferring and others preferring in such words.
Ruin-smoothing is a process that occurs in many varieties of British English where bisyllabic becomes the diphthong in certain words. As a result, "ruin" is pronounced as monosyllabic and "fluid" is pronounced as .
★ Phonological history of the English language
★ Phonological history of English vowels
★ Phonological history of English consonants
★ English consonant cluster reductions
★
★ Yod-dropping
1. http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:dRqKKxBEWLMJ:www.waseda.jp/ocw/AsianStudies/9A-77WorldEnglishSpring2005/LectureNotes/03_HKE_TonyH/HKE_unit3.pdf
2. Accents of English, Wells, John C., , , Cambridge University Press, 1982, ISBN 0-521-22919-7 (vol. 1), ISBN 0-521-24224-X (vol. 2), ISBN 0-521-24225-8 (vol. 3)
3. Macafee 2004: 74
4. Wells, ''ibid.'', pp. 132, 196–99; 351–53
5. Wells, ''ibid.'', p. 354
6. http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/pronunciation/, http://facweb.furman.edu/~wrogers/phonemes/phone/me/mvowel.htm
7. Wales, ''ibid.'', p. 206
Most dialects of modern English have two 'high back vowels': the close back rounded vowel found in words like ''goose'', and the near-close near-back rounded vowel found in words like ''foot''. This article discusses the history of these vowels in various dialects of English, focusing in particular on phonemic splits and mergers involving these sounds.
| Contents |
| Foot-goose merger |
| Foot-strut split |
| Merger of Middle English /y/, /eu/, and /iu/ |
| Shortening of to |
| Ruin-smoothing |
| See also |
| References |
Foot-goose merger
The 'foot-goose merger' is a phenomenon that occurs in Scottish English, Ulster varieties of Hiberno-English, Malaysian English and Singaporean English, [1] where the vowels and are merged. As a result, pairs like ''look''/''Luke'' are homophones and ''good''/''food'' and ''foot''/''boot'' rhyme. The merged vowel is usually or in Scottish English and in Singaporean English.[2] The use of the same vowel in "foot" and "goose" in these dialects is not due to phonemic merger, but the appliance of a different languages vowel system to the English lexical incidence [3]. The full-fool merger is a conditioned merger of the same two vowels before /l/, making pairs like ''pull''/''pool'' and ''full''/''fool'' homophones.
Foot-strut split
The 'foot-strut split' is the split of Middle English into two distinct phonemes (as in ''foot'') and (as in ''strut'') that occurs in most varieties of English; the most notable exception is Northern England and the English Midlands.[4]
The origin of the split is the unrounding of in Early Modern English, resulting in the phoneme . In general (though with some exceptions), this unrounding did not occur if was preceded by a labial consonant (e.g., , , ) and followed by , , or , leaving the modern . Because of the inconsistency of the split, the words ''put'' and ''putt'' became a minimal pair, distinguished as and .
In non-splitting accents, ''cut'' and ''put'' rhyme, ''putt'' and ''put'' are homophonous as , and ''pudding'' and ''budding'' rhyme. However ''luck'' and ''look'' are not necessarily homophones; many accents in the area concerned have ''look'' as , with the vowel of ''goose''.
The absence of this split is a less common feature of educated Northern English speech than the absence of the trap-bath split.[5] The absence of the foot-strut split is sometimes stigmatized, and speakers of non-splitting accents often try to introduce it into their speech, sometimes resulting in hypercorrections such as pronouncing ''pudding'' .
The name "foot-strut split" refers to the lexical sets introduced by Wells (1982), and identifies the vowel phonemes in the words, though that name may be a bit misleading as the word ''foot'' itself may have had a different vowel from ''put'' at the time the split occurred and so did not participate in the split.
Merger of Middle English /y/, /eu/, and /iu/
Middle English distinguished the close front rounded vowel (occurring in loanwords from Anglo-Norman like ''duke'') and the diphthongs (occurring in words like ''new'') and (occurring in words like ''few'').[6]
By Early Modern English, these three vowels merged as , which has remained as such in some Welsh, northern English, and American accents in which ''through'' is distinct from ''threw'' .[7] In the majority of accents, however, later became , which, depending on the preceding consonant, either remained or developed into by the process of yod-dropping, hence the present pronunciations , , and .
Middle English was commonly represented the spellings ''uCe'' and ''ue'' as in ''duke'' and ''hue'', while and were commonly represented by the spellings ''ew'' and ''eu'' as in ''dew''.
Shortening of to
In a handful words, including some very common ones, the vowel was shortened to . In a few of these words, notably ''blood'' and ''flood'', this shortening happened early enough that the resulting underwent the "foot-strut split" and are now pronounced with . Other words that underwent shortening later consistently have , such as ''good'', ''book'', and ''wool''. Still other words, such as ''roof'', ''hoof'', and ''root'' are in the process of the shift today, with some speakers preferring and others preferring in such words.
Ruin-smoothing
Ruin-smoothing is a process that occurs in many varieties of British English where bisyllabic becomes the diphthong in certain words. As a result, "ruin" is pronounced as monosyllabic and "fluid" is pronounced as .
See also
★ Phonological history of the English language
★ Phonological history of English vowels
★ Phonological history of English consonants
★ English consonant cluster reductions
★
★ Yod-dropping
References
1. http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:dRqKKxBEWLMJ:www.waseda.jp/ocw/AsianStudies/9A-77WorldEnglishSpring2005/LectureNotes/03_HKE_TonyH/HKE_unit3.pdf
2. Accents of English, Wells, John C., , , Cambridge University Press, 1982, ISBN 0-521-22919-7 (vol. 1), ISBN 0-521-24224-X (vol. 2), ISBN 0-521-24225-8 (vol. 3)
3. Macafee 2004: 74
4. Wells, ''ibid.'', pp. 132, 196–99; 351–53
5. Wells, ''ibid.'', p. 354
6. http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/pronunciation/, http://facweb.furman.edu/~wrogers/phonemes/phone/me/mvowel.htm
7. Wales, ''ibid.'', p. 206
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
