Talk:Open-mid back unrounded vowel

Various English realization of [ʌ]
The caveat for English phonetic transcription really only applies to English English, as GA really does use the open-mid back unrounded vowel (though specific American dialects use everything in the range [ɐ~ɜ~ʌ~ɔ]). Dave 06:48, September 8, 2005 (UTC)


 * What's your source for this? Ladefoged working on Southern Californian English for the IPA handbook has [ɐ], and Southern Californian is basically GA. The vowel is different from Vietnamese [ʌ]. kwami 09:43, 2005 September 8 (UTC)


 * I have not read Ladefoged, but it is not unreasonable that some of the Northern California Vowel Shift (or influence from Spanish?) could be lowering/fronting the /ʌ/ phoneme. Either way, however, neither the speech of Northern or Southern California is representative of what anyone would call "General American".  I've been exposed to speakers from every geographic region of the U.S., and I can indeed tell you that for everyone east of the Mississippi and north of the Mason-Dixon Line - including myself - /ʌ/ is definitely a back vowel.
 * As for comparing these values to Vietnamese, it seems nobody can even agree on what the phonetic values are. So that's not the best point for comparison.  For contrast, though, I'd say that I notice when people front /ʌ/ from where I (as a reasonably-GA speaker) am used to hearning it.  The worst culprits are the Aussies and American Southerners (who also lengthen it, like they do to all other short vowels).  I'm also increasingly hearing it on the BBC.  So take that for whatever it's worth.


 * Dave 05:00, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Living in Connecticut, I agree. Centralized doesn't sound right, and it seems I would have to go some distance before hearing it as a non-prototypical /ʌ/ (granted, I haven't been to every possible location in the US. As such, I don't think the article is accurate as stated, and leaves out the largest US region that uses it. Gumbini (talk) 16:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, that is definitely not what dialectologists and sociolinguists note for North America. Most North American realizations are central. – ishwar  (speak)  21:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Is Thomas (2001) the source for as the realization in Ohio and Texas English? — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 00:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, he specifically mentions speakers from Johnston, Ohio as consistently having (because he has lots of data from that town, it seems that's where his mother's from). And he says "most" of the Texas speakers in his data have this vowel. – ishwar   (speak)  04:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Reverting recent edits...
Since we were discussing the very thing that was subsequently changed (without comment on this page), I don't think the anonymous edits were reasonable.

Newfoundland and Philadelphia?
I don't believe those are the only dialects with this sound - I am Canadian (but not a Newfoundlander) and my dialect still contains this sound. Inter change  able | talk to me  16:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I suppose you could seek out a source that says as much. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]  00:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

ə
Article needs treatment of how exactly this sound differs from ə. — Llywelyn II   07:41, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what is your question. Both of these vowels are unrounded. is mid and central, while  is open-mid and back (or near-back). Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 14:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Audio
I would like to recommend which I have made to replace the current. Can I get a stamp of approval? Shouai (talk) 02:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hear, hear! Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 16:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * No! Your recording sounds like the vowel in American English but, which is not actually — it's centralized, and is more accurately written . Go to the article and listen to the recording for that vowel, and you'll hear that it's very similar to the American English but.  is the conventional transcription of that vowel, but it was only (I assume) accurate for some earlier period in English or for a different dialect. It's not accurate for modern American English.


 * The recording in the article sounds a little odd to my ears, but the oddness is likely because the speaker is making the vowel fully back, rather than slightly centralized. Hence, the "weird" recording may actually be accurate. You'll hear a similar thing if you go to the article for : it doesn't really sound like the in American English bet. I think the American English vowel is a little centralized, and the recording in the article is fully front.


 * In general, the recordings of the vowels in the phonetics articles are sort of "idealized": fully back, fully front, or central. Back ones will not slightly fronted (centralized) and neither will front ones be slightly backed (centralized) — even though in many languages this is the actual realization of the vowels. — Eru·tuon 21:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think it has much to do with American English. British English has the same thing as well (AFAIK) and has had such since World War II. Do you come from a dialect in which this sound is still present in its original form, Erutuon?
 * Also, the audio file given for /ɛ/ sounds normal to me. Then again, I speak a dialect of New England English, so perhaps /ɛ/ is pronounced differently in other parts of North America. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 21:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I believe you're right about many dialects of British English, but I was just being conservative in my statement — I speak American English with the centralized vowel and can't personally vouch for all British dialects. My statement that the vowel was formerly back or back in some dialect of English comes from something I read — regrettably, not sure what it was; something by Joseph Wright? I've forgotten what it was or what exactly it said.


 * Historically speaking, the vowel transcribed developed from  in Middle English, as noted in, and assuming the vowel  was back, the earliest pronunciation of  after the split may have been as well. A change from back  to back  would be simple vowel lowering. Then the change of  to , yielding the pronunciation in many Modern English dialects, would be centralization and a little more lowering. Not sure if there is evidence that this is how the change progressed, but just offering a possible sequence of events.


 * Interesting. I suspect centralization of is frequent in my Midwestern dialect but not in your New Englander one, and I guess I'm influenced by it to some degree, as much as I might try to avoid it! — Eru·tuon 21:25, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Older RP
Older RP indeed had something close to (yes, front), or near-open, much like Cockney. Its presence in the table was probably due to the text below it. I have nothing against removing it, as the typical RP is, as you know,. Gimson (2014) states that (near-back) is regaining its prestige value, and describes it as being an alternative to  in the General British accent. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

World War II
Unless World War II directly caused the shift, which would need further explanation, it shouldn't be a reference of time since it simply isn't the reason for it. --2.245.156.161 (talk) 05:23, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Name of this symbol: ʌ
The article says this symbol, ʌ, is called a wedge, caret or hat. When I go to this website and mouse over the symbol, it calls it a turned "v" or hut. "Hut" makes more sense to me than "hat" because it has the sound of the vowel. Has anyone else heard of the symbol ʌ being called turned "v" or hut? DBlomgren (talk) 23:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Technically it is a turned "v", so you might as well call it so. Mr KEBAB (talk) 01:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)