Language desk
< June 3	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 4

GOOSE vowel

According to Phonological history of English close back vowels, most dialects of modern English have the close back rounded vowel /uː/ (realized as central [ʉː] in many dialects) found in words like goose. Is this only a dialectal difference or also a historical one? The article on the second variant says "realized as back [uː] in the conservative variety of RP", which implies that it was more common in the past. Is this true of all or many dialects?

Simply put, was the word "beautiful" and were other words with the GOOSE vowel pronounced with the close back rounded vowel in most or all varieties of English in the 18th century? Even simpler put, was this the pronunciation common in performances of Handel and other vocal music and in educated speech in London at the time? --Espoo (talk) 08:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The /juː/ in beautiful derives from /ɪu/, which was merged into /juː/ "in London by the late 17th century" according to Phonological history of English close back vowels#Development of /juː/ (citing Wells 1982), so the answer to your last question is yes. Nardog (talk) 10:25, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. So did the pronunciation of GOOSE with central [ʉː] derive from that, not independently? When did it come to London approximately? --Espoo (talk) 12:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean by "derive from that, not independently". The merger of /ɪu/ clearly predates the fronting, so it couldn't have derived from /ɪu/, if that's what you're asking (remember not all /juː/ derives from /ɪu/). It is possible that the fronting started in the post-/j/ environments, where it's most common, as Jansen (2018: 302) points out, but also note [u] is cross-linguistically unstable anyway. Jansen estimates the fronting has been ongoing "for at least a century" in southern England, but a fully central [ʉ] as a prestige realization must be much newer (I bet it arose in the last 50 years or so). Nardog (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I guess "fronting" means the transition from /uː/ to /ʉː/, so if i understood correctly, all the "many dialects" who have /ʉː/ derived/got this from /uː/. I was confused by our article only talking about the "development of /juː/" since the transition from /uː/ to /ʉː/ apparently happened with all use of the GOOSE vowel, not just after /j/. --Espoo (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

all the "many dialects" who have /ʉː/ derived/got this from /uː/ That is correct. GOOSE-fronting encompasses not just [ʉ] but more extreme cases like [y] as in California though. I don't understand why you'd be confused by the article. The article isn't only talking about the "development of /juː/". That section is just one section in an article about [u, ʊ] in general. Nardog (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your time and help. There's no need to answer the following since it's mainly an explanation of problems in the comprehensibility of that article.

The article confusingly mentions that /ʉː/ came from /uː/ only in the section on the development of /juː/, despite this change apparently happening everywhere /uː/ occurred in those dialects, not only after /j/ (though apparently always first there). The intro says that /ʉː/ is how /uː/ is "realized" (less confusing: pronounced) in many dialects, but neither the intro nor the rest explain that the former was always chronologically preceded in those dialects by the latter (and nowhere arrived at by a different route). The change of /uː/ to /ʉː/ is also mentioned in passing i.e. is essentially buried in a description (in "Other changes") of the breathtaking variety of other less common changes of the pronunciation of /uː/ in other dialects. --Espoo (talk) 05:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article confusingly mentions that /ʉː/ came from /uː/ only in the section on the development of /juː/ I seriously know don't understand what you're talking about. Phonological history of English close back vowels#Development of /juː/ contains no ⟨ʉ⟩. And it's "buried" because it doesn't involve a change in the phonological inventory. It's a subphonemic change, and hence "realized". Nardog (talk) 07:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]