Is the word “on” pronounced like /ʌn/ or /ən/ instead of /ɔn/ when it is unstressed?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
0
Is the word "on" pronounced like /ʌn/ or /ən/ instead of /ɔn/ when it is unstressed in an American accent?
grammar pronunciation vocabulary
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
0
Is the word "on" pronounced like /ʌn/ or /ən/ instead of /ɔn/ when it is unstressed in an American accent?
grammar pronunciation vocabulary
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
add a comment |
0
0
0
Is the word "on" pronounced like /ʌn/ or /ən/ instead of /ɔn/ when it is unstressed in an American accent?
grammar pronunciation vocabulary
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Is the word "on" pronounced like /ʌn/ or /ən/ instead of /ɔn/ when it is unstressed in an American accent?
grammar pronunciation vocabulary
grammar pronunciation vocabulary
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
asked 2 days ago
BellaBella
111
111
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Bella is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
add a comment |
3
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
3
3
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
1
Pronunciation of the preposition or particle on is affected by the cot-caught merger, fully complete in many areas of North America, though far less so in the American South. In dialects with the merger, on sounds like /ɒn/ and /ɔn/ in those without. English, Australian, and New Zealand accents generally remain unaffected while most Scottish accents have merged the other way.
In any variety of American English, the vowel in on never reduces to a schwa, in contrast, say, to with, which in rapid speech can reduce the vowel to schwa and elide the th if followed by the equally reduced definite article the. In this respect, on is like off and up, whose vowels never reduce, but unlike to, which does.
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
No, on does not have a weak form. It is always pronounced with a full vowel as /ɒn/ (mainly British English), /ɑn/ (American English without low back merger), /ɔn/, etc.
Here are some sources sharing this view:
- "Note: There is no weak form for on /ɒn/." (from: Low, E. (2015) Pronunciation for English as an International Language. New York, Routledge.)
- "on ɒn ɑ:n ɔ:n" [note, the entry makes no mention of a weak form] (from: Wells, J. C. (2008) Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. Harlow: Longman.)
- "The preposition on has no weak form" (from: Burleigh, P & Skandera P. (2016) A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology. Tübingen: Narr.)
- "Prepositions [...] a few have no weak forms: off, on, up." (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the Unversity of Brunei Darussalem)
- "< on > DOES NOT HAVE A WEAK FORM REDUCED TO SHWA!" (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the University of Lublin, Poland)
- "The following function words have no weak form, no matter how unstressed they are: did, may, might, in /ɪn/, on /ɒn/, with /wið/, off /ɒf/, up /ʌp/" (from a scanned page of a phonology text book, found here)
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
|
show 9 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Bella is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f492833%2fis-the-word-on-pronounced-like-%25ca%258cn-or-%25c9%2599n-instead-of-%25c9%2594n-when-it-is-unstres%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
1
Pronunciation of the preposition or particle on is affected by the cot-caught merger, fully complete in many areas of North America, though far less so in the American South. In dialects with the merger, on sounds like /ɒn/ and /ɔn/ in those without. English, Australian, and New Zealand accents generally remain unaffected while most Scottish accents have merged the other way.
In any variety of American English, the vowel in on never reduces to a schwa, in contrast, say, to with, which in rapid speech can reduce the vowel to schwa and elide the th if followed by the equally reduced definite article the. In this respect, on is like off and up, whose vowels never reduce, but unlike to, which does.
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
Pronunciation of the preposition or particle on is affected by the cot-caught merger, fully complete in many areas of North America, though far less so in the American South. In dialects with the merger, on sounds like /ɒn/ and /ɔn/ in those without. English, Australian, and New Zealand accents generally remain unaffected while most Scottish accents have merged the other way.
In any variety of American English, the vowel in on never reduces to a schwa, in contrast, say, to with, which in rapid speech can reduce the vowel to schwa and elide the th if followed by the equally reduced definite article the. In this respect, on is like off and up, whose vowels never reduce, but unlike to, which does.
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
1
1
Pronunciation of the preposition or particle on is affected by the cot-caught merger, fully complete in many areas of North America, though far less so in the American South. In dialects with the merger, on sounds like /ɒn/ and /ɔn/ in those without. English, Australian, and New Zealand accents generally remain unaffected while most Scottish accents have merged the other way.
In any variety of American English, the vowel in on never reduces to a schwa, in contrast, say, to with, which in rapid speech can reduce the vowel to schwa and elide the th if followed by the equally reduced definite article the. In this respect, on is like off and up, whose vowels never reduce, but unlike to, which does.
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
Pronunciation of the preposition or particle on is affected by the cot-caught merger, fully complete in many areas of North America, though far less so in the American South. In dialects with the merger, on sounds like /ɒn/ and /ɔn/ in those without. English, Australian, and New Zealand accents generally remain unaffected while most Scottish accents have merged the other way.
In any variety of American English, the vowel in on never reduces to a schwa, in contrast, say, to with, which in rapid speech can reduce the vowel to schwa and elide the th if followed by the equally reduced definite article the. In this respect, on is like off and up, whose vowels never reduce, but unlike to, which does.
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
answered 2 days ago
KarlGKarlG
23.2k63362
23.2k63362
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
add a comment |
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
The first paragraph seems irrelevant, no? The question is not about the phonetic realization of the vowel in different American accents, but about the possibility to reduce the vowel when it is unstressed.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
If the vowel doesn’t reduce — except, apparently, for Peter Shor — then it's pronounced like something. I provided the something.
– KarlG
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
There are American dialects without the cot-caught merger where on is pronounced /ɑ/. In fact, the line between /ɔn/ and /ɑn/ is one of those marked on this map of American English dialects. The Midland and South pronounce it /ɔn/; the more northern dialects (including New York and Chicago) pronounce it /ɑn/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
@PeterShor: Unless my ears deceive me, those regions have the merger. Northern Cities fronts the vowel. In MI, it's especially pronounced.
– KarlG
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
Many areas with the Northern Cities vowel shift supposedly do not have the merger. It moves /ɔ/ to where /ɑ/ should be, but it fronts /ɑ/, so it gets out of the way of /ɔ/.
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
No, on does not have a weak form. It is always pronounced with a full vowel as /ɒn/ (mainly British English), /ɑn/ (American English without low back merger), /ɔn/, etc.
Here are some sources sharing this view:
- "Note: There is no weak form for on /ɒn/." (from: Low, E. (2015) Pronunciation for English as an International Language. New York, Routledge.)
- "on ɒn ɑ:n ɔ:n" [note, the entry makes no mention of a weak form] (from: Wells, J. C. (2008) Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. Harlow: Longman.)
- "The preposition on has no weak form" (from: Burleigh, P & Skandera P. (2016) A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology. Tübingen: Narr.)
- "Prepositions [...] a few have no weak forms: off, on, up." (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the Unversity of Brunei Darussalem)
- "< on > DOES NOT HAVE A WEAK FORM REDUCED TO SHWA!" (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the University of Lublin, Poland)
- "The following function words have no weak form, no matter how unstressed they are: did, may, might, in /ɪn/, on /ɒn/, with /wið/, off /ɒf/, up /ʌp/" (from a scanned page of a phonology text book, found here)
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
|
show 9 more comments
1
No, on does not have a weak form. It is always pronounced with a full vowel as /ɒn/ (mainly British English), /ɑn/ (American English without low back merger), /ɔn/, etc.
Here are some sources sharing this view:
- "Note: There is no weak form for on /ɒn/." (from: Low, E. (2015) Pronunciation for English as an International Language. New York, Routledge.)
- "on ɒn ɑ:n ɔ:n" [note, the entry makes no mention of a weak form] (from: Wells, J. C. (2008) Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. Harlow: Longman.)
- "The preposition on has no weak form" (from: Burleigh, P & Skandera P. (2016) A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology. Tübingen: Narr.)
- "Prepositions [...] a few have no weak forms: off, on, up." (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the Unversity of Brunei Darussalem)
- "< on > DOES NOT HAVE A WEAK FORM REDUCED TO SHWA!" (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the University of Lublin, Poland)
- "The following function words have no weak form, no matter how unstressed they are: did, may, might, in /ɪn/, on /ɒn/, with /wið/, off /ɒf/, up /ʌp/" (from a scanned page of a phonology text book, found here)
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
|
show 9 more comments
1
1
1
No, on does not have a weak form. It is always pronounced with a full vowel as /ɒn/ (mainly British English), /ɑn/ (American English without low back merger), /ɔn/, etc.
Here are some sources sharing this view:
- "Note: There is no weak form for on /ɒn/." (from: Low, E. (2015) Pronunciation for English as an International Language. New York, Routledge.)
- "on ɒn ɑ:n ɔ:n" [note, the entry makes no mention of a weak form] (from: Wells, J. C. (2008) Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. Harlow: Longman.)
- "The preposition on has no weak form" (from: Burleigh, P & Skandera P. (2016) A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology. Tübingen: Narr.)
- "Prepositions [...] a few have no weak forms: off, on, up." (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the Unversity of Brunei Darussalem)
- "< on > DOES NOT HAVE A WEAK FORM REDUCED TO SHWA!" (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the University of Lublin, Poland)
- "The following function words have no weak form, no matter how unstressed they are: did, may, might, in /ɪn/, on /ɒn/, with /wið/, off /ɒf/, up /ʌp/" (from a scanned page of a phonology text book, found here)
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
No, on does not have a weak form. It is always pronounced with a full vowel as /ɒn/ (mainly British English), /ɑn/ (American English without low back merger), /ɔn/, etc.
Here are some sources sharing this view:
- "Note: There is no weak form for on /ɒn/." (from: Low, E. (2015) Pronunciation for English as an International Language. New York, Routledge.)
- "on ɒn ɑ:n ɔ:n" [note, the entry makes no mention of a weak form] (from: Wells, J. C. (2008) Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. Harlow: Longman.)
- "The preposition on has no weak form" (from: Burleigh, P & Skandera P. (2016) A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology. Tübingen: Narr.)
- "Prepositions [...] a few have no weak forms: off, on, up." (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the Unversity of Brunei Darussalem)
- "< on > DOES NOT HAVE A WEAK FORM REDUCED TO SHWA!" (from a handout produced by a lecturer at the University of Lublin, Poland)
- "The following function words have no weak form, no matter how unstressed they are: did, may, might, in /ɪn/, on /ɒn/, with /wið/, off /ɒf/, up /ʌp/" (from a scanned page of a phonology text book, found here)
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
answered 2 days ago
Richard ZRichard Z
1,457314
1,457314
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
|
show 9 more comments
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
This does not tally with my experience. In a sentence like He went on a drinking spree, I have always heard (and also myself pronounce) on with a reduced vowel: [ʌn ~ ən ~ n̩] are all perfectly natural variants to me (the last one perhaps only possible specifically before the indefinite article).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
Where are you from?
– Richard Z
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
A bit of all over the place, but accent-wise roughly evenly divided between fairly generic Broadcast American and fairly generic Estuary.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
Hm, well those are two radically different accents. I think your reduced pronunciation of on is quite unusual... Your example sentence would likely be perceived as He went an[d] a drinking spree.
– Richard Z
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
@JanusBahsJacquet Would you also find yourself dropping the 't' from want? Most of my experience of American speech is derived from film and television but I feel that a lot of Americans, even well spoken and well educated ones, would say "He wen' on a drinking spree" with the 'o' run into the truncated 'went' and weakened. This is much less likely to happen in British RP speech.
– BoldBen
2 days ago
|
show 9 more comments
Bella is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
draft saved
draft discarded
Bella is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Bella is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Bella is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f492833%2fis-the-word-on-pronounced-like-%25ca%258cn-or-%25c9%2599n-instead-of-%25c9%2594n-when-it-is-unstres%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Possible duplicate of the weak form of 'on'
– Peter Shor
2 days ago
I think you're right. That's is essentially the same question.
– Richard Z
2 days ago