Rainb0wSkeppy@lemmy.world to 196English · 5 months agoghoti rulelemmy.worldimagemessage-square18fedilinkarrow-up1166cross-posted to: linguistics_humor@sh.itjust.works
arrow-up1166imageghoti rulelemmy.worldRainb0wSkeppy@lemmy.world to 196English · 5 months agomessage-square18fedilinkcross-posted to: linguistics_humor@sh.itjust.works
minus-squareJojo, Lady of the Westlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·5 months agoPretty sure “caught” won and “cot” lost in the caught-cot merger. I don’t think most Americans would conceive of it as an “o” sound
minus-squareZagorath@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·5 months agoWhen I hear an American with the caught/cot merger say “caught”, it sounds way more similar to my (unmerged) “cot” than my “caught”
minus-squareJojo, Lady of the Westlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·5 months agoI believe you. I meant more that it “won” conceptually than phonetically. To an American ear it sounds more like “aw” or “ah” than “o”.
minus-squareZagorath@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·5 months agoOh yeah, maybe. I don’t really know how you’d measure that.
Pretty sure “caught” won and “cot” lost in the caught-cot merger. I don’t think most Americans would conceive of it as an “o” sound
When I hear an American with the caught/cot merger say “caught”, it sounds way more similar to my (unmerged) “cot” than my “caught”
I believe you. I meant more that it “won” conceptually than phonetically. To an American ear it sounds more like “aw” or “ah” than “o”.
Oh yeah, maybe. I don’t really know how you’d measure that.