Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 175 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Visit Stack Exchange
29

This is a so-called “linking semivowel”. It’s typically not perceived as being as strong a sound as “original” syllable-initial /w/, so some linguists don’t like to transcribe it (see this blog post by the phonetician John Wells). The difference could be compared to the more drastic difference between the pronunciation of /p/ in “keep it” vs. “key pit”; ...


11

Changing things like did you and bet you into sounds that one might attempt to represent in spelling as “didju” or “didja” and “betchu” or “betcha” is something that happens with all speakers of English. Because the reasons behind it are based on where in your mouth those sounds are formed and what happens when you move quickly from one to the next, similar ...


8

One thing you need to understand is that the things you may have been taught “are” diphthongs are not necessarily such under all possible circumstances. And while some of this is the normal reduction in unstressed syllables, some of it is not — because they were never diphthongs to begin with for those speakers. In the case of vocabulary, since that’s in ...


6

The relevant rule: Elision of alveolar plosives /t/ /d/ In rapid, casual speech the alveolar plosives are commonly elided when preceded by the following consonantal sounds: In the case of /t/ preceded by /s, f, ʃ, n, l, p, k, tʃ/ ... In the case of /d/ preceded by /z, ð, n, l, b, g, dʒ/ Working with Words: An Introduction to ...


5

Book-writing [bʊk̚ˈɻʷʌɪʔn̩] versus real speech What you’re seeing here is the simple reduction of weak syllables in casual connected English under fast speech rules, sometimes called allegro rules. It is perfectly common in all native speakers everywhere. These reduction processes are much too complicated and variable to describe here, but this is ...


5

The short answer is "not usually." Text segmentation--for example, the boundaries between words in print--is a different phenomenon from speech segmentation. Anyone listening to someone speaking a foreign language will be hard-pressed to determine where one word ends and the next begins. Semantic context, grammar, and other contexts are required to know ...


5

Do you mean that the glide part of the diphthong can be lost when the vowel does not have primary stress? If so, yes, I also hear this. Similarly the long e: diphthong can lose its off-glide in the first syllable of words like "maintain" and the second syllable of words like "female".


4

With vocabulary it's easy -- a legit pronunciation with a diphthong reduced to ə is pretty common. But even the rest of the words you listed have weak pronunciation forms (with a possible exception of don't): No - nəʊ | noʊ — There is also an occasional weak form nə So - səʊ | soʊ — There is also an occasional weak form sə Don't - dəʊnt | doʊnt — This word ...


4

It is caused by lazy enunciation of the "consonant" Y which requires the tip of the tongue to move away from the teeth and palate. The J sound comes out when the tongue isn't moved as far.


3

The answer of tchrist is well researched, even if it is hard to understand. Here is something you can do to understand how it comes about. Take the sentence: "Don't you dare call me a liar like that!" Stand in front of a mirror and say the word 'don't', stopping dead on the 't' and watching and feeling very carefully exactly where you mouth and tongue ...


3

The English phoneme /t/ is most often realised as an unvoiced alveolar plosive, [t]. The term plosive is just another way of saying that the consonant is a stop. To make this sound the tip and blade of the tongue make a seal around the alveolar ridge. That is the little shelf-like part of your mouth behind your upper teeth. The vocal folds (also known as ...


2

You're right, most speakers don't pronounce this d clearly. It's often dropped entirely. When I say I'd drop it it sounds exactly like I drop it unless I'm making an effort to enunciate. Likewise I'd just go is indistinguishable from I just go. I think this is typical. The d is clearest when it's followed by a vowel. When I say I'd ask, my tongue briefly ...


2

I'd say what you're talking about here is actually the glottal stop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glottal_stop). The "d" doesn't just disappear; it's replaced with a shorter stoppage of airflow from the trachea. This makes the word faster to pronounce as the tip of your tongue doesn't have to hit the palate edge to pronounce the "d" but can simply press ...


2

Summary answer: Sort of but not really. Details: In articulate speech, the ends of 'what', 'that', and 'of' are never dropped, and are pronounced distinctly. In BrE (standard or RP), the word final 't' is released (or aspirated) so is very clear. In AmE, word final 't' is unaspirated and so doesn't sound as clear. In fast or inarticulate speech, BrE tends ...


2

The best rule in English is that you should ignore spelling for purposes of pronunciation and ignore pronunciation for purposes of spelling, as these two things each have their own separate stories. You must learn each one separately by rote, not attempt to infer one from the other. Sandhi effects have nothing to do with letters. They are purely phonologic ...


2

No. Need to look each word to verify pronunciation, for example, the o in opossum is silent and pronounced "possom." Per Cambridge Dictionary, Webster, and traditionary sources:​ /əˈpɑs·əm/ short form possum, US ​ /ˈpɑs·əm/


2

There is a difference between the pronunciation of the "v" in have and the "f" in of. The two sentences I have two fine dogs, I have to fine dogs, mean different things. (I possess two excellent dogs, and I am required to impose monetary penalties on dogs.) In all standard varieties of English, they are distinguished in pronunciation by a /v/ in ...


2

Try this: start by saying "with the sauce"... practice a few times until that phrase is smooth, then begin to suppress the vowel sound from "the", and keep diminishing the enunciation of "the" until it is completely imperceptible, not even the small "bump" between the first and third words. Now it should be easier to transition from the 'th' of 'with' to the ...


1

The one to speak is the one which is most clear and pronounces all of the letters. Regardless of which accent a native speaker uses on a daily basis, they will be able to understand English spoken as it appears in print. So if you pronounce the words individually, you will be understand. This is what I tell students when they say "I'm going to Ireland and ...


1

Yes, I agree with your observations, except that (1) I would identify the second vowel of your [ˈiɾɪŋ] as barred i, a high central-to-back vowel produced by assimilation to the following velar n, and (2) I don't hear a schwa after the glottal stop (so the glottal stop is explained as due to the change of t to glottal stop immediately before a non-fricative ...


1

/ˈsædərˌdeɪ/ > [ˈse˞deʲ] This isn’t all that uncommon. See the Carpenters’ Saturday, Saturday, ever-lovin’ Saturday! Merely recite the days of the week as fast as you can starting with Monday, like little kids do, and you always wind up hearing /ˈserdeɪ/, said [ˈse˞ˌdeʲ]. The same sorts of phonological reductions occur in words like bitterly, bladdery, ...


1

I can't imagine any other way to say "With this ring, I thee wed" other than withis. On the other hand, "my watch changes every time I look at it" would definitely include two ch sounds. Trying to think of other cases: Where do we wash shirts? Might be said with one prolonged sh sound. I think ch doesn't work because ch includes two sounds (t-sh) How about "...


1

If you reduce 'on', you get syllabic 'nn', which is the same as you get when you reduce 'in'. Since there are many contexts where either is possible, to avoid clashes, we refuse to reduce 'on': no matter how low the stress, the vowel quality will always remain. Of course, we could have chosen to do this to 'in' instead. But it's a question of conserving ...


1

It depends on whether one is speaking formally or informally. Formal-style speech will include the fully aspirated /h/, whereas in casual speech it is usually omitted. The difference is similar to the use of, for example, the more formal he is versus the more informal contraction he's.


1

It can be acceptable, and is certainly common in some dialects of English (particularly American Louisiana Cajun/Creole). Here in Michigan, USA, it seems that we typically do enunciate both letters in your sample sentence. But every dialect has oddities. For instance, in my Midwestern American dialect (and somewhat specific to Michigan) we say "real-a-tor"...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible