Whenever I look up a transcription for a word containing [o], it's either an [oɪ] diphthong or an [oʊ] diphthong. Is it not possible to pronounce [o] without gliding through [ʊ] too? Is it possible, but English simply doesn't do it? Or, do monophthong [o] words actually exist in English, and I simply haven't been able to find them? EDIT: This question regards any dialect of English.
6
-
1Which dialect of English? Each one has different vowels.– curiousdannii ♦Commented Sep 20, 2018 at 11:48
-
1@curiousdannii For both British and American.– abcjmeCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 12:30
-
1@abcjme you should edit the question to reflect that– ubadubCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:12
-
2This is an incredibly useful and informative resource whenever you want to find how English accents around the world realize words. (Take it with a grain of salt, though, because the transcriptions are very narrow, they rely on one speaker per accent, and the words are said in careful speech, not casual.)– NardogCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:43
-
2If you like that, check out the George Mason Accent Archive. Includes native dialects and foreign dialects of English, transcribed in IPA and identified as to location and language background.– jlawlerCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 19:06
|
Show 1 more comment
3 Answers
In Standard American English and Standard British English, no. /o/ is always realized as a diphthong, primarily [oʊ], or [o] may appear in other diphthongs, e.g. [oɪ] although this is usually closer to [ɔɪ]. In some dialects of English, notably Indian English and I believe some types of Caribbean English too, /o/ can be realized as a monophthongal [o].
-
6Monophthongal /o/ is a notable feature of Scottish English and Geordie. Also found in Welsh English and North-Central American English.– NardogCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:36
-
1
-
2@abcjme That difference is just convention. Phonemic notations (in slashes) and phonetic transcriptions (in brackets) are two entirely different beasts. You should look up the differences. I recommend this article as a starter.– NardogCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:46
-
3In American English lects, there is normally a fairly pure [o] before [ɹ], where /o/ and /ɔ/ neutralize (i.e, there is no contrast in these lects between /or/ and /ɔr/). This neutralization is similar to that among /e/, /ɛ/, and /æ/ before /r/, as in Mary, merry, marry, which are only distinguished in N. America in New England; the rest of us pronounce them identically.– jlawlerCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 19:11
-
2@abcjme I see. Basically, any letter or letter combination in a transcription enclosed in slashes (e.g. /tʃɛkðəlɛnzwɛl/) is a phoneme—a set of similar sounds distinctive in a language. A transcription in brackets (or nothing, usually in bold) can include any amount/kinds of information depending on one's intention: It can be the same as the phonemic ([tʃɛkðəlɛnzwɛl]), very detailed ([tʃe̞ʔ͡kð̞əlɛ̃nzwæ̠ɫ]), or partially detailed ([tʃɛkðəlɛnzwɛɫ]). See IPA Handbook pp. 29–30.– NardogCommented Sep 23, 2018 at 12:24
Words like load, go, row are sometimes treated as having the phonological vowel /o/. That is a phonemic analysis of the where vowels are tense or lax, so we have the opposition i/ɪ, e/ɛ, u/ʊ, o/ɔ. Phonetically, it is usually recognized that the mid vowels are diphthongs, written as [ei], [ɛɪ] or [ɛi] among others. I think the phonetic facts support [ɛɪ, ɔʊ] over the competitors. The quality [ɔ] also occurs before [ɹ] as in "core". There are American and British dialects (spoken in the north, in both cases) where "goat" is [go:t]. I can't say that there isn't a dialect where short o in got, rot, sop is phonetic [o], but I haven't heard of one. I would say that short monophthongal [o] is non-existent in English.
-
1I think OP means the phonetic realization, not the letter nor the phoneme– ubadubCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:07
-
1@ubadub At the second glance, now it seems the question is whether a monophthongal [o] is found in English, not the phoneme /o/. Otherwise it doesn't make sense to mention "oɪ".– NardogCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:15
-
-
2And yet, people frequently confuse the two kinds of analysis, so as a public service it is best to clarify the difference, when a question leaves open the intended analysis.– user6726Commented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:27
According to the table in Wiktionary Appendix:English pronunciation words like not are pronounced using ɒ,ɔ or ɒ and words like force are pronounced using ɔː, oː oɹ, ɔɹ similar to words like horse (depending on the dialect of English).
So if you require o and do not allow ɔ there is still the possibility of the long oː or the o before an ɹ.
answered Sep 20, 2018 at 11:36
-
@ Vladimir F Ah, but even then, as a monophthong, it's strange that it must be long, or followed by an approximant. Are there are no circumstances in which a regular-length monophthong "o" can be followed by a consonant?– abcjmeCommented Sep 20, 2018 at 12:34
-
1@abcjme This is because of open syllable lengthening in Middle English, around the 13th century Commented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:24
-
@abcjme The tendency for the shorter vowel to be lax is still current across British & American English (compare the vowels of FLEECE and KIT, PUT and BOOT), but also Standard German and Dutch. Commented Sep 20, 2018 at 16:30