Talk:Flapping

message: Don't know if this really fits. I'm not a linguist but...
Isn't this known as consonant mutation? This happens alot in Turkish, with which I am very familiar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.139.241.33 (talk) 10:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consonant Mutation in Turkish the same 

message: Angr, I thought it was fair to note the other mergers, so nobody gets confused.  Any thoughts anybody?Cameron Nedland 13:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said in my edit summary, I thought mentioning those mergers in this context is more likely to confuse people, not less likely. AFAIK all accents that have flapping also have the mergers in question; in fact, very few modern English accents don't. —Angr 14:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right.  I just wanted to help, it wasn't vandalism.Cameron Nedland 13:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I never thought it was vandalism! I hope I didn't give the impression I thought it was! I knew it was a good-faith edit; I just disagreed with its usefulness. —Angr 14:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, my bad!  I, just thought it might be confusing to someone who doesn't have the vowel mergers to see those listed as homophones.  I remember once reading that broad and rod don't rhyme, (in my accent they do) and I was pretty damn confused because no one clarified what accent they were talking about.Cameron Nedland 18:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of my notes 

message: Do some people really pronounce faculty as [fækəɫɾi]?  I'm an American linguist, and it seems to me I've never heard it and can when I try it it sounds totally foreign.  Isn't this a mistake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.64.79 (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2007
:Hmm... for me (also American), it's more like  than , but it's definitely not  except in careful speech. —Angr 04:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It almost depends on who I'm talking to, idk why though...Cameron Nedland 22:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I always pronounce it  but I might not notice it if someone flaps the /t/.  Maybe there's a better, more universal example.  Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 21:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I pronounce it with a t but the flap doesn't sound wrong to me. And  sounds off to me but substituting d for t seems pretty common. Maybe voiced consonants are easier to say between vowels or something.--66.153.117.118 (talk) 21:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flapping after /l/ 

message: I'm taking a flying guess here, having been linked thru from an equally ill-exposited part of the [Shibboleth] article, that the subject of all this is how some dialets would pronounce the example words more closely to "Budder, Barder, Faculdy" (to British ears, or others that pronounce an intermediate T as "T")?
Is there a chance of putting a brief note to this effect (as well as pointing out that it's only an approximation, I suppose) in the main text so that the article makes at least a little sense without having to pull up and continually refer to (or learn... haha) the IPA list? I'm not a linguist, I've tried getting with it and it just doesn't stick.
Not sure where exactly to put it without starting a massive flamewar over my edit, so I'm leaving it as a suggestion for now. I'll let the experts figure it out ;-)
Thanks 87.114.113.143 (talk) 12:17, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is impenetrable to the layperson 

message: I'm not a linguist, just an educated native speaker of American English.  Still, I have to ask, where do people pronounce "banter" the same as "banner"?  Likewise center/sinner, minty/mini, minty/many, planter/planner, and winter/winner.  I've lived in 4 different areas of the US and traveled to most of the states.  The only places I've been where these words are even close are places that I would characterize has having a string regional accent.  You won't find anyone on national TV or Radio pronouncing those words the same unless they are a character in a fictional work or a "real person" from one of the regional dialect areas that have this trait.  
I'd like for there to be at least a disclaimer noting that these "Homophonous pairs" are not necessarily homophonous across the majority of US speakers.  At best I'd delete them entirely.  
However, since I'm not close to expert on this topic, I'll leave it to someone who knows better to do the actual edit.
Jgro (talk) 05:29, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The American South.  It happens elsewhere too, I'm sure.  The article says it's more often in rapid speech, so if someone says "Jesus is the  of our lives" and you ask them to repeat themselves, they'll say "Jesus is the  of our lives" without the flapping.  Still, it's pretty informal, so that would explain why you don't hear it on TV. — Æµ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 11:39, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, flapping, especially after n, isn't thoroughgoing in all places where it's conceivable. I'm enough of a southerner to make winter a homophone of winner, and likewise center and "senner" (I don't do the ɛ to ɪ before n thing), but I would never flap in rare words like banter or polymorphemic words like minty and planter. I think some of these sample homophones are hypothetical, not confirmed. Angr (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  nt = nn??? 

message: I'm no linguist, but the examples in this passage seem completely nonsensical to me:
:Flapping/tapping does not occur in most dialects when the  or  immediately precedes a stressed vowel, as in retail, but can flap/tap in this environment when it spans a word boundary, as in got it → 
The statement itself is basically true—a  or  before a stressed syllable is usually not flapped. But the examples don't seem to illustrate this at all. In both retail and got it, the stress is normally on the first syllable—the one preceding the . Thus, these aren't actually examples of  preceding a stressed syllable. Am I missing something? It seems like retail should be replaced with something like attempt or baton, and got it should be replaced with something like got over. Does anyone disagree with this change? —Caesura(t) 02:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Your suggestion sounds right to me.  — Æµ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 12:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've replaced those two examples. —Caesura(t) 19:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect examples? 

message: Wasn't  retroflex? If so, is the representation with symbols useful at all, or the recent edit by that IPA with 177 as first number would not be a better transcription of a flap? I believe it is about both alveolar sounds. Lguipontes (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think technically the IPA doesn't make a distinction, so what 177 included was non-standard.  Still,  isn't correct either.  — Æµ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 16:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So, in your opinion, we should use the non-standard symbol, or none at all? Lguipontes (talk) 12:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say none at all. Flap consonant claims "For linguists that do make the distinction, the alveolar tap is transcribed as a fish-hook ar, [ɾ], while the flap is transcribed as a small capital dee, [ᴅ], which is not recognized by the IPA", but the claim is unsourced. AFAIK [ᴅ] is just the Americanist notation for [ɾ], and neither symbol is uniquely either a flap or a tap. Angr (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flap vs tap transcription 

message: Should it simply be called "flapping"? That already redirects here, and seems to be the common name for this phenomenon. The scope of the article is also not restricted to strictly intervocalic cases. W. P. Uzer (talk) 10:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense. The phrase "intervocalic alevolar flapping" is not as common as "alveolar flapping" and "intervocalic flapping." If there's another article that people might think to find by searching flapping (maybe related to flight?), we can put a hatnote to redirect them. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename article?

message: Could anybody verify this?  As an American, myself, I only flap the intervocalic /t/.  Any help is appreciated.  Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 20:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a cited table at fortis and lenis. It's pretty unusual to not flap /d/. Have you listened to a speaker who does it to see if you can even hear it? — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 23:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Many speakers maintain a distinction because of the preceding vowel. I recommend you find an audio file of an American speaker who flaps both and see if you can spot the flapping. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 22:09, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flapping of d 

message: “Southerners tend to pronounce winter and winner identically, while Northerners, especially those from the east coast, tend to retain the distinction [...]”
Southerners and Northerners from which country? Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV (talk) 12:43, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the US. Fixed, thanks for bringing it up. Nardog (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity 

message: *Vaux (2000), the most thorough account I could find on the phonological contexts around flapping, regrettably mistakes bottom as having a syllabic /m/ as opposed to /əm/. I seriously doubt syllabic /m/ could follow a stop (or any non-fricative). So Wells (1982:248) was probably right in saying "the following segment must not be a consonant (other than syllabic [l])" after all. (Which would explain why it occurs before [l̩, ɹ̩] but not before [n̩] better.)
*Flapping after /l/ is deemed impossible by Vaux (2000) (citing filter) and Hayes (2011) (citing guilty), but "variable" by Boberg (2015). Wells (1982) has builder (248) and guilty (251), though I'm not totally sure whether he means these are theoretical or actually produced.
Nardog (talk) 00:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It might be frustrating if you're trying to pin down the phonetics, but it's my understanding that there is enough free variation between syllabic m and [əm] that the two are semantically identical when speaking about English phonology. Not so much a mistake as it is imprecise. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 04:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Bottom doesn't become [ˈbɑt.m̩] though, unlike button, bottle or butter. Try saying [ˈbɑt̚.m̩] or [ˈbɑʔ.m̩], it would just sound like bomb-mm. Nardog (talk) 08:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Think of it like this. There is a phoneme that is sometimes realized as  and sometimes as . Because of the free variation, linguists might not even transcribe these differently even in narrow transcription so they'll even transcribe it as , even if it turns out that the  realization doesn't normally appear after . I think it's just a matter of imprecision. Because it's common to refer to phonemes as one of their primary realization so that  is called an alveolar stop despite its other allophones, I suspect referring to this as a syllabic m is shorthand.  — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 15:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But I feel like [ɾən] is quite common, while [ɾn̩] is not possible, in words like sudden, didn't, hidden, ridden, which it is most likely not in button, kitten, written, etc. Obviously the difference between [d] and [ɾ] may be hard to realize especially for speakers of a language wherein [ɾ] does not occur phonemically, or even for linguists to ascertain, but I could swear I've heard /dᵊn/ realized as [ɾən] a thousand times, or I'm crazy. And unless I am, that invalidates equating [əC] and [C̩] when discussing flapping. (But Vaux seems to mean by "flapping" just /t/ voicing rather than actual flapping/tapping of [d] or [t̬]—he's more of a phonologist than a phonetician—so that may be the reason he disregards this.) Nardog (talk) 09:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I fail to see how common  is over  invalidates what I've said. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 02:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't invalidate what you've said, in fact it validates it in that Vaux's analysis is imprecise. It invalidates identifying [əC] as [C̩] at least in the context of flapping because /d/ seems to be able to surface as [ɾ] before [ən] but not [n̩], suggesting the rules for flapping do not precede the rules for the free variation between [əC] and [C̩]. (But, again, this might be different in the case of /t/.) Nardog (talk) 03:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like you want to invalidate Vaux's analysis, though, which I've been trying to tell you is poorly motivated. His transcription is imprecise. That doesn't mean his analysis is. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 14:42, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on the sources 

message: It looks like someone has tagged Withgott effect without starting a discussion. It makes sense to me that we merge the two articles. Anyone oppose? — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 20:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. Klbrain added the tag simply because Wolfdog had added it at Withgott effect but not here in last August. You can see the discussion leading to this in #Problems with wording and piping right above (in which I asked you for help). As I stated at the time, I do think it should be merged but that article is so poor in terms of sourcing, clarity, and style, that I don't know how it should be improved, expanded, or merged—but if you do, please go ahead, it's been tagged for eight months. Nardog (talk) 03:00, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yeah, I guess there was a discussion. I don't know much about the topic, which is why I didn't respond. I think I can implement the move, though it might take me a few days to make sure it's done accurately. — Æµ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 01:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it! Wolfdog (talk) 13:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging content with Withgott effect

message: The section about there being a blanket prohibition on flapping foot-initial /t/ seems suspect.  Of the three examples given, one ("militaristic") definitely flaps for me except in slow, careful speech, and a second ("Mediterranean") comes close when spoken rapidly.  Could we maybe double-check the sources that claim that flapping is impossible in cases like these? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes 15:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This is such a well-documented phenomenon there is a body of literature dedicated to studying it. This paper gives a fairly accessible run-down on "the capitalistic vs militaristic debate" . It says "several researchers reported variability with respect to the flapping/aspiration of the /t/ ... Kim (2009) also observed free variation within a single speaker's responses as well as between speakers", so although I'm not sure if the statement is meant to extend to militaristic/Mediterranean, it is possible that you are such a speaker. You may listen to people pronounce them on e.g. YouGlish or PlayPhrase.me. Nardog (talk) 17:04, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is flapping really prohibited in "militaristic" and "Mediterranean"?