Talk:Open front unrounded vowel

Examples

I'm very certain that the Danish example is wrong here. To the best of my knowledge bade is pronounced with an [æ], not an [a].

Peter ^Isotalo 19:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Heger's Sprog & lyd is difficult to use due to the fact that the alternative Dania transcription system is used, but by comparing vowel charts and phoneme exampels (pg. 86, pg. 139), it is clear that this is not an [a] but an [æ].

Peter ^Isotalo 22:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

The Canadian line is confusing; it almost seems to be saying that stop and bat are both pronounced with [a] in Canadian English. I'm aware of the Canadian Shift leading to [a] in words like bat (in those parts of Canada which show the Shift) but surely these varieties don't also have [a] in stop; I thought they had something more like [ɒ].--JHJ 16:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I've always thought the Canadian vowel in stop was an unrounded low back vowel /ɑ/ not a rounded low back vowel /ɒ/, which is a feature of RP. I'm pretty sure CaE uses a similar, if not the same vowel used in GA. Mark 13:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

There's a vowel shift called the Canadian Shift - see the draft chapter 11 of Labov et al's Atlas of North American English, p128. The symbol [ɒ] for the relevant vowel is used there. However, since it doesn't seem to be [a] (except maybe in Newfoundland, based on the red dots on Map 13.1 in the draft Chapter 13 of the ANAE), whether it's [ɒ] or [ɑ] isn't really relevant to whether it belongs on this page.--JHJ 16:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, is the Hungarian example right? Short <a> in Hungarian seems to be usually transcribed [ɒ] (see Hungarian phonology), while long <á> is [aː].--JHJ 16:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I added that [a] occurs in the Boston accent. I'm from Massachusetts, and it was actually the example of the Boston accent that taught me what sound [a] represented. --68.160.39.155 06:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Problem with example

From the article:

• In GA this vowel occurs only as the first part of the diphthongs [aɪ], as in light [laɪt]; and [aʊ], as in how [haʊ]. However, in the Great Lakes region, this vowel occurs in words like stock as a result of the Northern Cities Vowel Shift.

The problem is that the diphthong in "light" is [ʌɪ], not [aɪ]. Perhaps the example should be changed to "lied" ([laɪd]) instead? Tomer^talk 23:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

GA doesn't have Canadian raising. Other than minute phonetic length differences, the vowels in GA light and lied are the same. AEuSoes1 08:39, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

In the western US, these are [ʌɪ] and [aɪ]. Don't know how different this is from GA. kwami 10:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

This isn't a matter of Canadian raising, it's a matter of the fact that before unvoiced obstruents, the diphthong [aɪ] is, in GA, pronounced [ʌɪ], not [aɪ]. As made clear in paragraph two of the Canadian raising affects both /ai/ and /au/. Regardless of what our article says about GA, if Tom Brokaw were to say [laɪt] instead of [lʌɪt], people would think he'd gone crazy, or was exhibiting some bizarre affectation. The difference in GA is not between [lʌɪt] and [laɪd], but between [lʌɪt] and [la:ɪd]. Canadian raising actually shortens the [ʌ] to [ə]. Believe me, there's a big difference between what I'm talking about and Canadian raising—call it "American raising" if you must, but it's definitely not Canadian raising, and my point remains that the example in the article is inaccurate. Tomer^talk 22:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Well then change the example to lied or lie. AEuSoes1 23:04, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I speak something close to General American, and I don't pronounce light as [lʌɪt]. Some people in the South and Philadelphia might pronounce it that way though. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 00:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Canadian raising of /aɪ/ (but not /aʊ/) is rampant throughout the US. Here in California, basically everyone I have recorded and measured for F1 and F2 have [ʌɪ] (but not [ʌʊ]) before voiceless consonants. I don't know if Canadian raising is more extreme for both diphthongs, but regardless, there is raising in the US, and not just near the Canadian border! --SameerKhan (talk) 01:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but that's California, not the Midwest (where I'm from). I don't really care much about it though, because it's not very noticeable.208.104.45.20 (talk) 07:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

@208.104.45.20: I disagree regarding the midwest; this trait is universal in Wisconsin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c44:237f:accb:9807:7ae3:178b:65dc (talk) 17:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Canadian raising of /aɪ/ in the U.S. is an innovation, but it's increasingly common. Jack^(Lumber) 16:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hold on. Although since somebody last spoke, here the row of American English was removed. However, the General American pronunciation is not [ʌɪ]. It is either [a̟ɪ] or possibly [äɪ], for in the event of Canadian raising, the sound is raised to [ɐɪ].

Furthermore, in California English the true [ʌ] sound doesn't even exist. The /ʌ/ class is typically pronounced as [ɛ]. There are areas of the country where the [aɪ] is backed. However, that is primarily found in Staten Island, (possibly the rest of New York City as well; but I can only speak for Staten Island). Also, it is not backed to [ʌɪ]. It's backed to [ɑɪ].

To the one, who suggested that such a sound might appear in Philadelphia or Southern English, although such a sound does not appear in either dialect, I do commend you for your manners.

Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@74.102.216.186 So if I travel to the state of California and cut off a native in traffic, the words that go along with the stiff raised middle finger would be pronounced [ˈfɛk juː]? I find this hard to believe. Bladesinger46n2 (talk) 12:35, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

#97 can't be the right entity code

There is no guarantee that &#97; will have an "umbrella" (not sure what the typographic term for the thing covering the top of the lowercase-a is called.) Isn't there an actual Unicode entity number for this "a" which doesn't depend on the default font? --James S. 17:28, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Please see Talk:Voiced bilabial plosive. --James S. 18:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

ä?

What's with all the ä's? Shouldn't an IPA article contain stanrd IPA characters? 惑乱 分からん 10:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Granted, it's central. Sorry. 惑乱 分からん 11:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Distinguishing open and central low vowels

I changed "no language distinguishes" to "few languages distinguish" since my own dialect of Vietnamese actually distinguishes between these two. The absolute "no languag distinguishes" claim is uncited and, even in the absence of my counterevidence, impossible to prove.

18.238.6.5 20:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I think a better way of addressing the uncited nature of this information is to put {{fact}} after it. Altering the wording to fit a different understanding is not removing uncited material. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The bigger issue at hand was not that it was uncited, but that it was *wrong* (as well as invited). Absolute statements usually are wrong, no matter what they are about, and making an absolute statement non-absolute IMO is *almost* ;) always warranted, in addition to whatever other remedies may be called for Firejuggler86 (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Italian transcriptions

When Italian words are given as examples (in these entries about the vowels in the IPA etc.), long vowels are sometimes transcribed as such, sometimes are not.

In Italian, vowel length is certainly not distinctive; nevertheless, to indicate it in transcriptions aimed e.g. at speakers of Germanic languages has been judged surely useful from a pedagogical point of view by Max Mangold (who transcribes Italian words with [ː] in his Aussprachewörterbuch).

Since these transcriptions are phonetic ([...]), not phonematic (/.../), the length mark MIGHT be used.

But the point is: for the sake of consistency, either always or never.

(In Italian, only the vowels that are at the same time 1) stressed, 2) at the end of the syllable, 3) not word-final are [phonetically] long; all the other vowels are [phonetically] short. Examples: cane [ˡka:.ne], gatto [ˡgat.to], perché [per.'ke].) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom Hope (talk • contribs)

Yes. Sorry for not signing.

Just a postscript: also John C. Wells transcribes Italian words with the length mark in his Longman pronunciation dictionary. Tom Hope 23:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You ought to put that information in Italian phonology, which seems to already incorporate that in its transcription. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 03:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, all right. But at any rate we should decide whether in these phonetic transcriptions – I mean, in the transcriptions of these entries about the vowels of the IPA – the length mark should be added or not.

Both choices are legitimate, but, for the sake of consistency, the length mark should be either always or never present. Tom Hope 16:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

English

The English examples need to be revamped. At least in some of Canadian, Northern, Scottish, Jamaican, and Irish English, the "ash" may actually vary from [æ] to [ä]; in ScotE, it's often if not usually centralized; in IrE, CanE and NorthEngE, it may also be [æ] or [æ̞]; and many (if not most) General American speakers (at least those without the cot-caught merger) realize the LOT vowel as a central [ä]. Jack^(Lumber) 16:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you Jack, but it's hard to show all of that on the table. I also think that California could be added to the table although the vowel shift there isn't near as widespread as, say, the Northern Cities Vowel Shift. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The California shift is also way more recent than the NCS, and it's not clear if it will become the dominant pattern or if it's just a Valley Girl thing. In Labov's ANAE (which makes no mention of the California shift), a speaker from Nevada has a Canadian-like ash (but no Canadian shift). There's no reason why the speech of Nevada should be any different than that of California--assuming that such a thing as a California dialect exists. And, to answer one of your earlier questions, if you find yourself fronting the cot/caught vowel at times, well, that's a good reason not to realize /æ/ as [a]... Jack^(Lumber) 15:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I realize that I wouldn't ever merge the vowel of cat with the vowel of cot. I also realize that dialects don't care about state boundaries. Thanks anyway though. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 23:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Dialects don't care about state boundaries, but there are other things that separate most Californians and Nevadans from one another..mountain ranges and deserts and the like..but I am sure that residents of South Lake Tahoe CA and Stateline NV likely speak the same dialect

Firejuggler86 (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Chicago

According to this article by Corrine McCarthy, /ɒ/ = /ɑ/ is not in low-front position, but low-central position in Chicago. Thegryseone (talk) 02:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

So we should put dots above the a? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 07:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't know. It probably is in low-front position in other places. I was just trying to make the point that the region is not homogenous. Thegryseone (talk) 18:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Neither are Canadian, Irish, or Scottish, but I think that pointing out such differences would be beyond the scope of this page, which is supposed to demonstrate the occurrence of the vowel in particular languages/dialects, regardless of the fact that some or many speakers may actually use another vowel. In the Inland North, the LOT vowel may be anywhere between [ä] and [a] (someone may even have [æ]); IPA symbols are just reference points, like mile markers on a highway. By the way, /ɑ/ = [ä] can be considered "General American," at least if you don't have the cot-caught merger. Jack^(Lumber) 13:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Conflict between official standards and actual practice

Formerly, the intro did not clearly enough state the fact that many linguists ignore the official description of /a/ as a front vowel and use it to represent a central vowel, often with /æ/ representing a front vowel. In fact, I think that it's far more common for /a/ to represent a central vowel than a front vowel (esp. as, ignoring length differences, most languages have only one low vowel, which is usually central). However, I don't have any refs for this, so in the intro I merely say it's "common" to do things this way. Benwing (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems that in the Americanist phonetic notation, <a> has been used for a central vowel, which may partly explain the confusion (especially among North American linguists). – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Audio sample too central?

(In response to Benwing's comment above)

Thank you for pointing this out. If I'm not mistaken, the sound sample is also of a central vowel rather than a front vowel. It sounds much more like the sample of near-open central vowel than that of near-open front unrounded vowel. If this is so, the misleading sample should at least be relabeled and probably replaced. It has caused confusion in e.g. discussion about Finnish phonology (the letter ä there does not refer to a central vowel but reflects Finnish orthography and is usually regarded to stand for [æ]). – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 04:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Note, however, that the Finnish orthographic a is usually strongly backed (i. e., [ɑ]), so much that /æ/ (i. e., orthographic ä) is often realised as a low front vowel [a] like in Standard Italian, compare the lowered (or even retracted/centralised) /æ/ in much of England, especially in the north.

FWIW, to me the sample sounds like a front vowel, i. e., more like the Standard Italian a, which is fronted, than the Standard German a, which is a central vowel. It's somewhere in between the (retracted) Standard German a (i. e., [ä]) and the /æ/ of Standard Finnish or RP. Therefore, the sample reflects the "theoretically correct" – Italianate – vowel quite well. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:58, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds to be compared (if available at wiki) are here: IPA vowels chart with audio. -DePiep (talk) 22:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. My impression is that (Standard) Italian (not in the north, where it is central), Hungarian (only the long low vowel), and dialectally Finnish have the front vowel. It is also present in Bavarian (a lowering of historical /æ/ just like in English and Finnish, although I believe it has happened already in the Middle High German period) and in many Low German dialects (and – to a certain extent – Standard German in Northern Germany, due to Low German influence), where the short vowel is front and the long vowel back and may even be rounded (ar may turn into a long front vowel). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 04:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems that you are discussing the phonemes of various languages or dialects rather than the cardinal vowel, which serves as a phonetic reference point. Actually, I'm surprised to see that the article doesn't speak anything about [a] being a cardinal vowel, as defined by Daniel Jones.

Compare Wikipedia's current audio sample to Jones's pronunciation of [a], which is clearly a front vowel. To me, Wikipedia's current audio sample of [a] sounds much more central than Jones's and rather similar to [ä] in the chart linked by DePiep, whereas Jones's [a] is not far from Wikipedia's [æ]. – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

The article has now been expanded with some basic information of [a] being a cardinal vowel. On the other hand, I find Geoff Lindsey's acoustic analysis of vowels intriguing, especially as regards [a]. He criticizes the traditional IPA vowel chart and describes [a] as a kind of extra-open vowel, for which the front/back distinction does not basically have much significance. His synthesized audio sample of [a] is not quite as front as Jones's, but to me it still sounds a little more front than Wikipedia's current sample. – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 13:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I would like to recommend this recording which I have made to replace the current. Can I get a stamp of approval? Shouai (talk) 02:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an expert in phonetics, but to me, the current audio sample sounds like [ä] instead of [a]. Your recording seems to be more accurate. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The new sample now seems to redirect to the older sample (which is of a central vowel). Actually, looking at the file history, I think even the new sample suggested by Shouai sounds more central than Daniel Jones's pronunciation of [a] linked above. – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

big error

this sound doesn't exist in english besides in the long sound of i (aI), therefore this sound should be removed. Also some spanish and portuguese information would suit well to the moderator, right? 190.148.195.143 (talk) 05:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

It depends on dialect. A number of them do have this very vowel as a monophthong, though General American and Received Pronunciation do not. What do you mean by "moderator"? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 12:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

American English

I've added "pasta" for American English. In American English, the first "a" in "pasta" is pronounced as /a/. In Canadian English and some other dialects they say the first "a" as /æ/ (such that it has the same sound as the "a" in "dad." -Helvetica (talk) 09:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

In General American, it's much more back. We already have listed examples of where it's not and we have GA listed at open back unrounded vowel. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 13:02, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Korean

I propose adding 나 (na) to the example table. 65.222.236.25 (talk) 17:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC) CoreyFloyd

According to Korean phonology, it's an open central vowel. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 20:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

French

Could French be added? It has it: http://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/Annexe:Prononciation/fran%C3%A7ais Israell (talk) 03:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Neither Wiktionary nor Wikipedia are reliable sources. Fortunately, I have one (or two, we'll see). I'll add French ASAP. Peter238 (talk) 03:10, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Done. Peter238 (talk) 04:20, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

"Extra-open" unrounded vowel

In the introduction, there is an interesting reference to a blog post by Geoff Lindsey, whose depiction of [a] deviates from the canonical IPA vowel chart and has here been characterized as an "extra-open central unrounded vowel". I can understand why you might want to call it "extra-open" in this context (though it is basically the same sound that has traditionally been classified as the open front unrounded vowel). However, I'm afraid it may be a little misleading to call it "central", as Lindsey does not actually classify it as a central vowel on the customary front/back scale. What he does say is that "a is located centrally, below schwa" on his modified vowel chart, but it is also aligned with front vowels and back vowels. Therefore, I feel that characterizing it simply as central does not do justice to Lindsey's analysis.

As far as I can see, Lindsey's point is that although [a] has traditionally been classified as a front vowel, it is a matter of perspective whether you regard it as front or central, or even as back. As Lindsey puts it: "The front/back ambiguity of a could be enshrined explicitly by the addition of a connecting line to the 'back' series." If you classify the "extra-open unrounded vowel" as central, the implication is that there are distinct front and back variants, which according to Lindsey is not the case. – Simo Kaupinmäki (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct. However, the formants define it as central (it has the F1 value of central vowels) and if we just call it an "extra-open vowel", that would seem to be analogous to a "high vowel" or "mid vowel" -- i.e., that there may be several extra-open vowels differentiated by backness. Can you think of a wording that would capture both the fact that there is no diffentiation and that by F1, which defines backness, it is central, without actually calling it "central"? — kwami (talk) 19:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Sound sample

The sound sample seems to be wrong. It sounds like /ä/, not /a/. 2A02:1205:C6A9:FC40:F0B0:A830:4F22:2EEC (talk) 20:37, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Confusion of open front and open central vowels

With the confusion between the open front vowel and the open central vowel, I am left with two questions.

• Which one is the a in Classical Latin?
• In Standard English, which one is the nucleus of the long i sound?

Any insight is appreciated. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.102.218.18 (talk) 00:39, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

1. Nobody knows for sure, but it was probably central.

2. Depends on the dialect, but it's normally more central than front, or in-between (front-central). In Southern England and Australia (and some other places), it is very often back [ɑ]. Mr KEBAB (talk) 00:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

RP /a/ vs /ae/

I just copy my edit summary here regarding the RP /a/. The source makes disctincion between Conservative RP, Mainstream RP, and Contemporary RP, classifying /ae/ as Conservative, and about /a/ says only: "Younger RP speakers generally use an <a> sound, a rare example of RP speech moving closer to northern English pronunciation." Therefore, we cannot say that /a/ is RP in general. I think this RP /a/ should be removed from the list for he time being unless a more specific source is found, and the distinctions between several "types" of RP are adressed. WikiHannibal (talk) 16:33, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm a native RP speaker (born and raised in a small town in Surrey in the mid 1990s). My mother (also born in Surrey, in the 1960s) and myself and virtually every single person I have ever met uses the vowel in this article /a/ (?) rather than the other vowel /ae/, which I imagine could be heard in the speech of some of the very elderly, possibly you would have to go back to old television/radio recordings. I think this sound change in RP is essentially complete, or will be very soon, and so I don't think it is a good idea for you to remove this RP /a/ as virtually every RP user who reads this article will be using /a/ and anyone who wants to learn RP or learn anything about it will be interested to know that this vowel is used in RP. 84.215.97.119 (talk) 01:26, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, and it should also be noted that in the *context* of the statement quoted by the OP, "younger speakers" means younger than Lady Silvia, and was noting generally that use of /ae/ rather than /a/ has become a distinctly *Conservative* RP trait. Taken as a whole, we can logically infer that /a/ has become the vowell that "general" RP uses, and there is not really any dubiousness... Firejuggler86 (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

/a/ vs /a:/?

This article provides no help whatsoever in distinguishing /a/ vs /a:/. Seems like a real oversight! Peter G Werner (talk) 14:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Find yourself a teacher of phonetics for that. The vowel length symbol doesn't even mean the same in every language. In English, the alleged 'long monophthongs' /iː, uː/ are more clipped than /ɜː, ɔː, ɑː/ before fortis/voiceless consonants and in that way resemble the diphthongs (which they are in contemporary RP: [ɪj, ʉw]). So ⟨iː, uː⟩ are just wrong for (RP) English, and even more wrong for Australian English (I'll never understand the choice of ⟨iː⟩ for AuE). In German and Swedish, there is no such distinction and they retain their length regardless of the type of consonant that follows (at least in primarily stressed syllables). Sol505000 (talk) 07:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)