 This e-lecture discusses the fundamental segmental phonological parameters to keep the phonological dialects of present-day English apart. This includes variation in the system of vowels, the discussion of some selected consonants and their particular realization and more general aspects such as the use of the post-vocalic R. A fundamental phonological division of the English varieties depends on the phonetic realization of the orthographical R after vowels. In the so-called non-rotic phonological dialects of present-day English, the R is not pronounced after a vowel, so it becomes zero. In the rotic varieties by contrast, the R is overtly realized in post-vocalic environments. Thus, we get far and farm in non-rotic varieties and far and farm in rotic varieties. However, the story is not as simple as that. First, the actual realization of the orthographical R is different across the varieties of English and some of these are more difficult to produce after vowels. For example, in North American English, the post-vocalic R and the R in general is realized by a retroflex approximate as in choror. In Canadian English, the alveolar approximate is used just like in received pronunciation, the phonological dialect that is associated with England or in Australian English, whereas in Scottish English, by contrast, an alveolar trill or an alveolar flap are used. Another problem occurs if we look at the varieties in particular. No variety of present-day English is totally rotic or totally non-rotic. For example, in the rotic varieties, it has been shown that the use of the post-vocalic R may be dependent on factors such as social prestige, as shown by William Labov in his studies about the use of R in New York City. Or on geographical factors, as I will show with an example from the South, where speakers, for example from Alabama, vocalize the R before vowels. Let's listen to this example. Now here's the example and I want you to pay attention to two words which are marked in the line below. One of them is the word airplane. So please look at this line here where we have the words airplanes and airport and listen to what Bell M from Birmingham in Alabama says. They have terminated them and then we have a lot of airplanes. We live close to the airport now. They have, you know, a lot of nice things. Birmingham is a nice place. Well, vocalization of post-vocalic R in the South of the United States. In received pronunciation, the non-rotic phonological dialect associated with England, there are two contexts where the R does occur in a post-vocalic position. One of them is called linking. So here we have linking where an R is inserted if certain conditions are adhered to. For example, the next word must start with a vowel, father and son. Instead of father and son, this is optional though. And the second even more dramatic case is the intrusive R where you can insert an R between two words where the first ends and the second starts with a vowel. The vowels must be of particular kind though. And here is the R so you can say India and China instead of India and China. Now these examples show that no dialect, no phonological dialect is 100% rotic or non-rotic. Thus it seems reasonable to define the phonological dialects in terms of degrees of roticity rather than in a binary fashion. So for example if we take received pronunciation in England this would be relatively low on the roticity scale whereas North American English the variety used in the United States is relatively high, perhaps not 100%. Now Canadian would be lower than the variant spoken in the United States and Scottish with a different type of R somewhere in the middle. Let us now look at the other consonants. Most of them are used in a uniform way in the varieties of English. For example there is no problem with an alveolar fricative such as S as in C or KISS or a bilabial nasal as in MAN or HAM and so on. However there are some consonants that can be used in various ways. The first of them is the palatal approximate year as in year. Now in some contexts it can be dropped. For example you have the choice between new and new and you know this can be associated with particular phonological dialects. Well this effect is called YOD dropping. Here is another one, H dropping. Now depending on the variety you use you might have the choice for example in Cockney in London many people would say OUS instead of HOUSE. So where the glottal fricative is simply dropped or replaced by an initial glottal stop. Well here is a further effect which we might want to address as well TH replacement. There are again phonological varieties where the two types of dental fricatives might be replaced by labiodental fricatives such as in Cockney where people would prefer to say BROTHER instead of BROTHER or THIN instead of THIN. Or here I have another example where you might replace this by for example D or T for example in Irish English. This example here where I have a speaker from Cork in Ireland. Now here we are with our example. Now perhaps we should listen to the word thinking which is a good example of TH replacement in Irish English. Michael and Mara have been planning to go to Italy for a long time now. First they were thinking of going in July. And I think that's convincing enough. Let's now look at the realization of some consonants that is we are now proceeding with the alophonic level. On the level of alophones we can observe several realisational effects such as the alophones of T. This representation here does not mean that we are looking at the alophones of one particular phoneme in one variety. It simply lists possible realizations of T in the varieties of English. In many cases it is simply aspirated for example in initial position. But then we have varieties where even between vowels the T may be replaced by a glottal stop. For example in Cockney the London variety where people would prefer BROTHER instead of BROTHER. Some varieties use this glottal stop variant. For example Estuary English would prefer Scotland instead of Scotland. In North American English varieties well here we have an interesting case where T may even be replaced by D in words such as betting which come out as betting. Some people would even use an alveolar flap here. So T and D share the same alophone in intervocalic position. This phenomenon has become known as phonemic overlapping. Another interesting phoneme is the alveolar lateral. And again we can observe interesting varieties or variants. We can observe interesting variants in the phonological dialects of English around the world. For example in Estuary English we see a replacement of final alveolar lateral by W in words such as hew. In RP this would be hill, hill, hill. Or in Scottish lake we might even find an initial alveolar lateral which is velarized instead of a palatalized variant. Let us finally look at the vocalic phonemes. One possibility of phonological dialect classification on the basis of vowel simply uses a reference system and relates other vowel systems to it. Now here is an example of a vowel system. In fact it is the vowel system of received pronunciation. The accent that most foreigners would probably refer to as typical British accents. Accent. Here we have the system of monophones and we could now classify them. We have 12 monophones. We could group them into long and short, tense and lax, high and low, front and back. Here we have a front vowel. C. Here we would have a back rounded vowel. Two. And so on. Well and here is the system of diphthongs and again we could say something about the diphthongs about the onset. Boy. And the glide and the end position of the diphthong and so on and so forth. Now in addition to this we can also look at ongoing vocalic changes. An approach that William Le Boeuf applied in his Atlas of North American English. So let us list vocalic changes here. For example here we have a change which stands for a merger. Here we have a complex change shift. And so on and so forth. So there are various changes, mergers, splits that can classify a particular phonological variety. Here are two speakers from North America. One from Phoenix in Arizona and one from Edmonton in Canada. Even though their sound systems are different they share one feature. A particular sound shift. Let us listen to them. Now here is the first speaker. A speaker from Phoenix in Arizona. And the interesting case occurs in the region of the back vowels. Listen to these two examples. Caught. Caught. And you see there is no difference between the two words caught and caught. Now this is my more or less British pronunciation. And if we now compare this vowel system with the one of our speaker from Edmonton. You will see interesting parallels. So here we have our speaker and now you see it's the same situation in the region of back vowels. Despite the fact that the other vowels are all a little bit different. Caught. Caught. No difference between caught and caught. Now sound shifts like these here the so-called low back merger allow us to make generalizations. For example that there are principled relationships between speakers from Canada and speakers from the Southwest West in the United States. And speakers from the Southwest in the United States. Both can be defined as phonological dialects where the low back merger is used pervasively. Let's summarize. The following aspects will guide us through the classification of the phonological dialects of English in all our e-lectures. The degree of roticity. The phonemic as well as the alophonic classification and realization of selected consonants. The discussion of ongoing vocaliic changes. And of course special properties of individual sound systems. See you again in one of our e-lectures about the phonological varieties of present day English.