English accents

9. Comparing pronunciation differences

 Two approaches to a typology of accents
• Structuralist
– oriented towards the
phonemic systems involved
– requires a static synchronic
description of what each
accent is like
– e.g. /r/ is or is not found
nonprevocalically
(i) ˈfɑːrmər
(ii)ˈfɑːmə
farmer
• Historical/generativist
– oriented towards dynamic
phonological rules or
processes
– requires a dynamic account
of how each accent got that
way
– e.g. the r deletion rule has or
has not applied
r Ø / _C and _||
ˈfɑːrmər ˈfɑːmə
Trubetzkoy 1931
Les différences phoniques existant
entre deux dialectes peuvent être de
trois sortes: elles peuvent concerner
• le système phonologique
• ou bien la réalisation
phonétique des divers
phonèmes
• ou encore la repartition
étymologique des phonèmes
dans les mots.
D’après cela nous parlerons de
différences dialectales
phonologiques, phonétiques et
étymologiques.
Phonic differences between two dialects
may be of three kinds: they may
concern
• the phonological system
• or the phonetic realization
of the various phonemes,
• or the etymological
distribution of the
phonemes in words.
Accordingly we shall speak of
phonological, phonetic and
etymological
differences between dialects.
systemic (= phonological) differences

• relate to the phonemic system (= the

phonological inventory), e.g.
– the size and nature of the vowel system
– presence/absence of specified oppositions, e.g.
• FOOT and STRUT, /ʊ - ʌ/, push and rush
• THOUGHT and LOT, /ɔː - ɒ/, stalk and stock
• /eː - ɛɪ /, late and eight
– also subsystemic differences, e.g.
• vowels before /r/, merry and marry
phonetic (= realizational, allophonic) differences

• relate to details of articulation, e.g.

– aspiration or nonaspiration of /p, t, k/
– environments in which aspiration is used
– type of /r/ used ([ɹ, ɻ, ʋ, ɾ, ʁ…])
– quality of a specific vowel, e.g. DRESS [e, e̞, ɛ̝, ɛ ,…]
̈
START [aː, ɑː…]
GOAT [o, oː, ɵː, ɔː, oʊ, əʊ, ʌʊ…]
 distributional ('etymological') differences

• relate to which phonemes are used in which

words, e.g.
– does zebra have /iː/ or /e/?
– does graph have /æ/ or /ɑː/?
– does transition have /s/ or /z/?
– where is the stress in controversy?
 distributional ('etymological') differences

• two types:
– phonotactic (structural):
restrictions on the distribution of phonemes, e.g.
• environments in which /r/ is permitted
• whether the cluster /hw/ is permitted
– lexicophonetic (selectional, incidential):
phonemic makeup of particular lexical items, e.g.
• /f/ or /v/ in nephew
• /aɪ/ or /iː/ in either and neither
• /æ/ or /ɑː/ in BATH words
test yourself

Are the following differences between accents systemic

(phonological), phonetic, or distributional?

1. In accent A, soft has the same vowel as THOUGHT; in

accent B, the same vowel as LOT.

2. In accent C, rot and rat sound identical, as do block and

black and all other LOT-TRAP pairs; in accent D, they are
distinct in pronunciation.

3. In accent E /l/ is always clear. In accent F it is clear before

vowels, but dark elsewhere.
test yourself

1. In accent A, soft has the same vowel as

THOUGHT; in accent B, the same vowel as LOT.

distributional

(lexicophonetic)
test yourself

2. In accent C, rot and rat sound identical, as do block

and black and all other LOT-TRAP pairs; in accent D,
they are distinct in pronunciation.

systemic (phonological)
test yourself

3. In accent E /l/ is always clear. In accent F it is clear

before vowels, but dark elsewhere.

phonetic

(realizational)
disadvantages of Trubetzkoy's approach

• It depends on the phoneme theory

and shares its shortcomings,
e.g. difficulty in coping with
– neutralization, e.g. /iː ~ ɪ/ in happy
– indeterminacy, e.g. l vocalization, as [mɪok] milk
– items marginal to systems, e.g. /x/
– no place for rules, e.g.
the t-to-r rule, as [geɹ ɒf] get off
assimilation, as [ʃtɹɒŋ] strong
 Two approaches to a typology of accents
• Structuralist
– oriented towards the
phonemic systems involved
– requires a static synchronic
description of what each
accent is like
– e.g. /r/ is or is not found
nonprevocalically
(i) ˈfɑːrmər
(ii)ˈfɑːmə
farmer
• Historical/generativist
– oriented towards dynamic
phonological rules or
processes
– requires a dynamic account
of how each accent got that
way
– e.g. the r deletion rule has or
has not applied
r Ø / _C and _||
ˈfɑːrmər ˈfɑːmə
 The historical/generativist approach

• compares the historical (diachronic) sound-

changes which the accents in question have
undergone,
or the synchronic rules they operate now,
e.g.
– one accent has a rule, another doesn't
• r dropping [ˈfɑː(r)mə(r)] farmer
• g deletion [ˈsɪŋ(g)ə] singer
• split of FOOT and STRUT put - cut
• t voicing shutter - shudder
• diphthong shift PRICE vowel
The historical/generativist approach

– the details of a rule or its environment differ in

different accents, e.g.
• yod dropping [s(j)uːt] suit; [n(j)uː] new
• preglotttalization [ˈeɪ(ʔ)prən] apron
• smoothing [fa(ɪ)ə] fire
Disadvantages of the historical/generativist
approach

• tends to confuse diachrony and synchrony;

• has no place to describe lexical transfers,
e.g.
questions such as zebra with /iː/ or /e/,
envelope with /e/ or /ɒ/
(= lexicophonetic differences)