Change and stability ingoose,goatandfoot:back vowel dynamics in Carlisle English

Abstract

In this article, I demonstrate that goose-fronting is taking place in Carlisle, a city in the north-west of England, and I provide detailed information about this change. The results show that similarly strong linguistic constraints are found in this variety and other varieties. A second point of discussion is the dynamics between goose and other back vowels, i.e. goat and foot, in this community. I argue that we also need to study the most adjacent back vowels in order to understand the complexity of this vowel change and the influence on nearby vowels. The data stem from interviews conducted in Carlisle between 2007 and 2010 and show that while goose is fronting across apparent time, for goat and foot no change in progress is observable. These dynamics seem to be geographically restricted to the north-west of England. While a parallel shift of goose and goat is very common in US and southern English varieties, the fronting of goat is not found in this northern variety. This lack of change is due to the monophthongal realisation of the goat vowel which prevents a parallel shift. Similarly, the fronting of foot seems to be blocked due to the lack of the foot–strut split.

Dynamic acoustic-articulatory relations in back vowel fronting: Examining the effects of coda consonants in two dialects of British English

“…Previous research shows that the lateral context is the last stage to show fronting (Baranowski, 2017). Notably, this mismatch and variability is more pronounced for foot, which we also expect to be at a later stage of sound change (Jansen, 2019). It could be the case that pre-lateral fronting of both vowels is in-progress in the communities under study in this paper, with foot being a much newer change.…”

Chapter 4. Modeling regional variation in voice onset time of Jutlandic varieties of Danish

“…Pillai scores represent "the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that can be accounted for, given the independent variable(s)" (Adank et al, 2004: 3106). As demonstrated in a number of recent sociophonetic studies, Pillai scores can be used to effectively measure the extent of merger in individual speakers (Hay et al, 2006;Kennedy 2006;Hall-Lew 2009;Nycz 2019). Thus, they are employed here to evaluate both the moan/mown and goose/moan mergers.…”

The role of style in the ethnolect: Style-shifting in the use of ethnolectal features in first- and second-generation speakers

“…Phonological environment accounts for possible assimilation effects. Following Jansen (2019), for goose , preceding phonological environment was coded as /j/, anterior coronal, or other; and following phonological environment was coded as obstruent, sonorant, or other. For trap , following phonological environment was coded as nasal, obstruent, and other in order to account for the effects of the documented nasal split in Australian English (Grama, Travis, & González, 2019).…”