|
|
In a sense, English speakers, since that time, have been struggling
to
restore what the GreaT Vowel Shift changed, particularly the
effective
removal of the "A" sound, which was at the end of the "push chain"
and
practically wiped out of existence by the "raising" that occurred.
As
you all may have studied, Old English long "AE" was raised to the "E"
position, and long "A" was raised to the "O" position, and pretty much
all that was left was the short "A" and some diphthongs with "A"
components.
But since the (broad) "A" sound is perhaps the most common
vowel in ANY language, something had to give, and it did. So
we see
that, in some later varieties of English, Old English short "AE" changed
to "A", while in other varieties, Old English short "O" changed to
"A",
but with cases of both changes NOT often occurring within any one later
variety.
Well, we still see the results of that effort (which was no doubt
completely unintentional) today. In the modern varieties of English
which have the short "O", we see that the Old English pronunciations
of
"mast" (OE maest), "fast" (OE faest),
"glass" (OE glaes), and "brass"
(OE braes) have come to be pronounced
with the broad "A". On the other
hand, in the modern varieties of English which do NOT have the short
"O"
sound (as is common in North American and parts of northern England),
we
see that that Old English pronunciations of "god" (OE god),
"fox" (OE
fox), and "on" (OE on)
have come to be pronounced with the broad "A".
So both types of solutions resulted in the much prized "A" sound which
was very effectively reduced in frequency, due to the Great Vowel Shift.
So, if one wishes to restore (what was lost by sound change), perhaps
we
should consider pronouncing those "AE"s that were later converted
to
"A"s as "AE" again, and those "O"s that were converted to "A"s
as short
"O" again. It would certainly make our work as spelling reformers
a bit
easier. Of course, we are still left with the problems of getting
people to actually do that -- and I wouldn't hold my breath while I'm
waiting.
ESL speakers in Japan act as if the Vowel Shift never happened.
As for pronouncing words as they are spelled, this is a very
common
phenomenon among second-language users of English, already.
For
example, come to Japan, and listen to the English users here speak
English, and you can not help thinking that the Great Vowel Shift never
occurred. But then, it is quite common among native speakers
too. A
case in point is the word QUAY, which until very recently I pronounced
as KWAY (rhyming with "stay"), rather than as KI (= "key"). In
the end,
I guess it was because I never spoke the word (until recently, to a
New
Zealand friend -- who had a good laugh about it, I might add), and
had
never checked the proper pronunciation in a dictionary.
List of words that most people have enver heard spoken and so have to
resort to spelling pronunciation.
David
PS Those of you who may wish to see a very nice presentation on
Old
English phonology may wish to visit the following website:
<http://faculty.washington.edu/stevickr/graphotactics/sounds_contents.html>.
However, you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view all the information
because the files are in .PDF form.
The only thing that David skipped over was the fact that we need
the Alphabet in order to engage in Spelling Pronunciation.
By the way, except for AA and AE (which are lax vowels), my New Romaji
system utilizes single letters for LAX vowels and double letters for
TENSE vowels.
And so I guess that it pretty much the only justification
for using OO to represent the vowel of "awe." Now, if we could
only get
rid of that British short "o" (the 45th phoneme of English, I think),
it
would simplify things. But we just can't ignor it, I guess.
[we can merge it] we can double the consonant or use a grave accent
to show it.
Best regards,
David
PS Daughter is out of the hospital, so I can focus on other things
now.
1. CATSUP and KETCHUP are spelled differently. Why?
1. they reflect unraised and raised
versions of the stressed
vowel
2. they reflect different versions
of a fricative consonant
3. both of the above
2. Of KEEP and KEPT, which preserves the older vowel pronunciation?
1. KEEP
2. KEPT
3. In KEEP and KEPT, what accounts for the newer pronunciation?
1. a shift in long vowels affecting
Old English words
2. a shift in short vowels affecting
Old English words
4. BOW may be pronounced in at least two different ways. Why?
1. they reflect different varieties
of English
2. they reflect different histories
of English words
5. MEET, MEAT, and METE are all pronounced the same way. Why?
1. they reflect a convergence
of once different pronunciations
2. they reflect a divergence of
once similar spellings
