Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 21:57:19 -0400 From: TERRY IRONS Subject: An R-full mess Can anyone point me to recent work on post-vocalic r's? Along with the other resonant consonants, it's probably responsible for more front and back vowel merger/collapses than the recent earthquakes in Italy. Actually, the point of my question comes from a recent conversation with a student in one of my classes. In the class I interview and record each student and ask each student to use himself as the basis for a research project. After the recent interview session, this student was concerned about his transcription of post-vocalic R's. By the by, he is good at transciption and has a good ear. He said that his r's just didn't sound like those of the other people in the class (He also speaks French and spent last summer in France.) In response, and I may not have used the right terms, about which I am asking advice now, I told him that his post-vocalic r's were tauto-syllabic, representing a CVC syllabic structure (for the pronuncation of say, "car") whereas his classmates were syllabifying the r, resulting in what is really a CVV syllabic structure. In replying, please feel free to correct my use of terminology. But I would also like to know of work that looks at this difference, which impressionistically seems to me to be a significant variable. CJ Bailey comments on the difference in an ERIC paper, but I haven't found any other discussion of any substance. Help if you can. (Bailey suggests, if I read him correctly, that the difference is the defining variable of regional speech in American English.) Virtually, Terry (*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*) Terry Lynn Irons t.irons[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] Voice Mail: (606) 783-5164 Snail Mail: UPO 604 Morehead, KY 40351 (*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)