Cotcaught merger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description Template:Use American English

Script error: No such module "Listen". Template:IPA notice The cotcaught merger, also known as the Template:Sc2 merger or low back merger, is a phonological phenomenon present in some dialects of English where speakers do not distinguish the vowel phonemes in words like cot versus caught. Cot and caught, along with bot and bought, pond and pawned, etc., are examples of minimal pairs that are lost as a result of this sound change; i.e. each of these pairs of words is pronounced the same. The phonemes involved in the cotcaught merger, the low back vowels, are typically represented in the International Phonetic Alphabet as Script error: No such module "IPA". and Script error: No such module "IPA". or, for United States English, as Script error: No such module "IPA". and Script error: No such module "IPA"..Template:Efn The merger is typical of most Indian, Canadian, and Scottish English dialects as well as some Irish and U.S. English dialects.

An additional vowel merger, the fatherbother merger, which spread through North America in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, has resulted today in a three-way merger in which most Canadian and many U.S. accents have no vowel difference in words like [[lexical set|Template:Sc2]] Script error: No such module "IPA"., Template:Sc2 Script error: No such module "IPA"., and Template:Sc2 Script error: No such module "IPA"..

However, Script error: No such module "IPA". before Script error: No such module "IPA". (as in Template:Sc2) participates in a separate phenomenon in most North American English dialects: the [[north–force merger|Template:Sc2 merger]]. So the vowel of Script error: No such module "IPA". can be phonemicized as the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA".;Template:Sfnp therefore, this particular sequence is sometimes alternatively transcribed as Script error: No such module "IPA".[1] or Script error: No such module "IPA"..[2]

Overview

Template:IPA vowels The shift causes the vowel sound in words like cot, nod and stock and the vowel sound in words like caught, gnawed and stalk to merge into a single phoneme; therefore the pairs cot and caught, stock and stalk, nod and gnawed become perfect homophones, and shock and talk, for example, become perfect rhymes. The cotcaught merger is completed in the following dialects:

Examples of homophonous pairs
Script error: No such module "IPA". or Script error: No such module "IPA". (written a, o, ol) Script error: No such module "IPA". (written au, aw, al, ough) IPA (using Template:Angbr IPA for the merged vowel)
bobble bauble Script error: No such module "IPA".
body bawdy Script error: No such module "IPA".
bot bought Script error: No such module "IPA".
box balks Script error: No such module "IPA".
chock chalk Script error: No such module "IPA".
clod clawed Script error: No such module "IPA".
cock caulk Script error: No such module "IPA".
cod cawed Script error: No such module "IPA".
collar caller Script error: No such module "IPA".
cot caught Script error: No such module "IPA".
don dawn Script error: No such module "IPA".
fond fawned Script error: No such module "IPA".
hock hawk Script error: No such module "IPA".
holler hauler Script error: No such module "IPA".
hottie haughty Script error: No such module "IPA".
knot nought Script error: No such module "IPA".
knotty naughty Script error: No such module "IPA".
nod gnawed Script error: No such module "IPA".
not nought Script error: No such module "IPA".
odd awed Script error: No such module "IPA".
pod pawed Script error: No such module "IPA".
pond pawned Script error: No such module "IPA".
rot wrought Script error: No such module "IPA".
sod sawed Script error: No such module "IPA".
sot sought Script error: No such module "IPA".
stock stalk Script error: No such module "IPA".
tot taught Script error: No such module "IPA".
wok walk Script error: No such module "IPA".

North America

File:Cot-caught merger.png
On this map of English-speaking North America, based on data from the 2006 Atlas of North American English, the green dots represent speakers who have completely merged the vowels of cot and caught. The dark blue dots represent speakers who have completely resisted the merger. The medium blue dots represent speakers with a partial merger (either production or perception but not both), and the yellow dots represent speakers with the merger in transition.[12]

Nowhere is the shift more complex than in North American English. The presence of the merger and its absence are both found in many different regions of the North American continent, where it has been studied in greatest depth, and in both urban and rural environments. The symbols traditionally used to transcribe the vowels in the words cot and caught as spoken in American English are Template:Angbr IPA and Template:Angbr IPA, respectively, although their precise phonetic values may vary, as does the phonetic value of the merged vowel in the regions where the merger occurs.

Even without taking into account the mobility of the American population, the distribution of the merger is still complex; there are pockets of speakers with the merger in areas that lack it, and vice versa. There are areas where the merger has only partially occurred, or is in a state of transition. For example, based on research directed by William Labov (using telephone surveys) in the 1990s, younger speakers in Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas exhibited the merger while speakers older than 40 typically did not.[13][14] The 2003 Harvard Dialect Survey, in which subjects did not necessarily grow up in the place they identified as the source of their dialect features, indicates that there are speakers of both merging and contrast-preserving accents throughout the country, though the basic isoglosses are almost identical to those revealed by Labov's 1996 telephone survey. Both surveys indicate that, as of the 1990s, approximately 60% of American English speakers preserved the contrast, while approximately 40% merged the phonemes. Further complicating matters are speakers who merge the phonemes in some contexts but not others, or merge them when the words are spoken unstressed or casually but not when they are stressed.

Speakers with the merger in northeastern New England still maintain a phonemic distinction between a fronted and unrounded Script error: No such module "IPA". (phonetically Template:IPAblink) and a back and usually rounded Script error: No such module "IPA". (phonetically Template:IPAblink), because in northeastern New England (unlike in Canada and the Western United States), the cotcaught merger occurred without the fatherbother merger. Thus, although northeastern New Englanders pronounce both cot and caught as Script error: No such module "IPA"., they pronounce cart as Script error: No such module "IPA"..

Labov et al. also reveal that, for about 15% of respondents, a specific Script error: No such module "IPA".Script error: No such module "IPA". merger before Script error: No such module "IPA". but not before Script error: No such module "IPA". (or other consonants) is in effect, so that Don and dawn are homophonous, but cot and caught are not. In this case, a distinct vowel shift (which overlaps with the cotcaught merger for all speakers who have indeed completed the cotcaught merger) is taking place, identified as the Dondawn merger.[15]

Resistance

According to Labov, Ash, and Boberg,[16] the merger in North America is most strongly resisted in three regions:

  • The "Inland North", encompassing the eastern and central Great Lakes region (on the U.S. side of the border)
  • The "Northeast Corridor" along the Atlantic coast, ranging from Baltimore to Philadelphia to New York City to Providence. However, the merger is common in Boston and further northern New England.
  • The "South", somewhat excluding Texas and Florida.

In the three American regions above, sociolinguists have studied three phonetic shifts that can explain their resistance to the merger. The first is the fronting of Script error: No such module "IPA". found in the Inland North, in which the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA". is advanced as far as the cardinal Script error: No such module "IPA". (the open front unrounded vowel), thus allowing the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA". to lower into the phonetic environment of Script error: No such module "IPA". without any merger taking place.[17] The second situation is the raising of the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA". found in Providence, New York City, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, in which the vowel is raised and diphthongized to Script error: No such module "IPA"., or, less commonly, Script error: No such module "IPA"., thus keeping that vowel notably distinct from the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA"..[17] The third situation occurs in the South, in which vowel breaking results in Script error: No such module "IPA". being pronounced as upgliding Script error: No such module "IPA"., keeping it distinct from Script error: No such module "IPA"..[17] None of these three phonetic shifts, however, is certain to preserve the contrast for all speakers in these regions. Some speakers in all three regions, particularly younger ones, are beginning to exhibit the merger despite the fact that each region's phonetics should theoretically block it.[18][19][20]

African-American Vernacular English accents have traditionally resisted the cotcaught merger, with Template:Sc pronounced Script error: No such module "IPA". and Template:Sc traditionally pronounced Script error: No such module "IPA"., though now often Script error: No such module "IPA".. Early-2000s research has shown that this resistance may continue to be reinforced by the fronting of Template:Sc, linked through a chain shift of vowels to the raising of the Template:Sc, Template:Sc, and perhaps Template:Sc vowels. This chain shift is called the "African American Shift".[21] However, there is still evidence of AAVE speakers picking up the cotcaught merger in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,Template:Sfnp in Charleston, South Carolina,Template:Sfnp in Florida and Georgia,Template:Sfnp and in parts of California.Template:Sfnp

Origin

In North America, the first evidence of the merger (or its initial conditions) comes from western Pennsylvania as far back as the data shows.[22] From there, it entered Upper Canada (what is now Ontario). In the mid-19th century, the merger also independently began in eastern New England,[23] possibly influencing the Canadian Maritimes, though the merger is in evidence as early as the 1830s in both regions of Canada: Ontario and the Maritimes.[24] Fifty years later, the merger "was already more established in Canada" than in its two U.S. places of origin.[24] In Canadian English, further westward spread was completed more quickly than in English of the United States.

Two traditional theories of the merger's origins have been longstanding in linguistics: one group of scholars argues for an independent North American development, while others argue for contact-induced language change via Scots-Irish or Scottish immigrants to North America. In fact, both theories may be true but for different regions. The merger's appearance in western Pennsylvania is better explained as an effect of Scots-Irish settlement,[25] but in eastern New England,[23] and perhaps the American West,[26] as an internal structural development. Canadian linguist Charles Boberg considers the issue unresolved.[27] A third theory has been used to explain the merger's appearance specifically in northeastern Pennsylvania: an influx of Polish- and other Slavic-language speakers whose learner English failed to maintain the distinction.[28]

Scotland

Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Outside North America, another dialect featuring the merger is Scottish English, where the merged vowel has a quality around [ɔ̞].[29] Like in New England English, the cotcaught merger occurred without the fatherbother merger. Therefore, speakers still retain the distinction between Script error: No such module "IPA". in Template:Sc2 and Script error: No such module "IPA". in Template:Sc2.Template:Sfnp

India

The merger is also quite prevalent in Indian English, possibly due to contact with Scottish English.Script error: No such module "Unsubst". In particular, the Template:Sc2 vowel may be lengthened to merge with the Template:Sc2 vowel Script error: No such module "IPA"..[30] However, there are also speakers who maintain a distinction in length and/or quality.[31] Like in Scottish English, this vowel is not usually merged with Template:Sc2 Script error: No such module "IPA". in General Indian English.

See also

Notes

Template:Notelist

References

Template:Reflist

Bibliography

Further reading

  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".

External links

  1. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. Template:Dictionary.com
  3. a b Script error: No such module "Footnotes".
  4. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  5. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  6. Script error: No such module "Footnotes".
  7. a b c Template:Harvp
  8. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  9. Template:Harvp
  10. Script error: No such module "Footnotes".
  11. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  12. Template:Harvp
  13. Template:Harvcoltxt
  14. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  15. Template:Harvp
  16. Template:Harvp
  17. a b c Template:Harvp
  18. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  19. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  20. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  21. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  22. Johnson, D. E., Durian, D., & Hickey, R. (2017). New England. Listening to the Past: Audio Records of Accents of English, 234. Template:ISBN.
  23. a b Johnson, Daniel Ezra (2010). "Low Vowels of New England: History and Development". Publication of the American Dialect Society 95 (1): 13–41. Script error: No such module "doi".. p. 40.
  24. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  25. Evanini, Keelan (2009). "The permeability of dialect boundaries: A case study of the region surrounding Erie, Pennsylvania". University of Pennsylvania; dissertations available from ProQuest. AAI3405374. pp. 254-255.
  26. Grama, James; Kennedy, Robert (2019). "2. Dimensions of Variance and Contrast in the Low Back Merger and the Low-Back-Merger Shift". The Publication of the American Dialect Society. 104, p. 47.
  27. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  28. Herold, Ruth. (1990). "Mechanisms of merger: The implementation and distribution of the low back merger in eastern Pennsylvania". Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
  29. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  30. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  31. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".