Thecot–caught merger, also known as theLOT–THOUGHT merger orlow back merger, is aphonological phenomenon present in somedialects of English where speakers do not distinguish the vowelphonemes in words likecot versuscaught.Cot andcaught, along withbot andbought,pond andpawned, etc., are examples ofminimal pairs that are lost as a result of thissound change; i.e. each of these pairs of words is pronounced the same. The phonemes involved in thecot–caught merger, thelowback vowels, are typically represented in theInternational Phonetic Alphabet as/ɒ/ and/ɔ/ or, forUnited States English, as/ɑ/ and/ɔ/.[a] The merger is typical of mostIndian,Canadian, andScottish English dialects as well as someIrish andU.S. English dialects.
An additional vowel merger, thefather–bother merger, which spread through North America in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, has resulted today in a three-way merger in which most Canadian and many U.S. accents have no vowel difference in words likePALM/ɑ/,LOT/ɒ/, andTHOUGHT/ɔ/.
However,/ɔ/ before/r/ (as inNORTH) does not undergo the merger, participating in a separate phenomenon in most English dialects worldwide: theNORTH–FORCE merger, wherein for instance words likecord andcored are pronounced the same, whilecard is pronounced distinctly.[b]
| IPA:Vowels | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Legend:unrounded • rounded |
The shift causes thevowel sound in words likecot,nod andstock and the vowel sound in words likecaught,gnawed andstalk tomerge into a singlephoneme; therefore the pairscot andcaught,stock andstalk,nod andgnawed become perfecthomophones, andshock andtalk, for example, become perfectrhymes. Thecot–caught merger is completed in the following dialects:
| /ɑ/ or/ɒ/(written a, o, ol) | /ɔ/(written au, aw, al, ough) | IPA (using ⟨ɒ⟩ for the merged vowel) |
|---|---|---|
| bobble | bauble | ˈbɒbəl |
| body | bawdy | ˈbɒdi |
| bot | bought | ˈbɒt |
| box | balks | ˈbɒks |
| chock | chalk | ˈtʃɒk |
| clod | clawed | ˈklɒd |
| cock | caulk | ˈkɒk |
| cod | cawed | ˈkɒd |
| collar | caller | ˈkɒlə(r) |
| cot | caught | ˈkɒt |
| don | dawn | ˈdɒn |
| fond | fawned | ˈfɒnd |
| hock | hawk | ˈhɒk |
| holler | hauler | ˈhɒlə(r) |
| hottie | haughty | ˈhɒti |
| knot | nought | ˈnɒt |
| knotty | naughty | ˈnɒti |
| nod | gnawed | ˈnɒd |
| not | nought | ˈnɒt |
| odd | awed | ˈɒd |
| pod | pawed | ˈpɒd |
| pond | pawned | ˈpɒnd |
| rot | wrought | ˈrɒt |
| sod | sawed | ˈsɒd |
| sot | sought | ˈsɒt |
| stock | stalk | ˈstɒk |
| tot | taught | ˈtɒt |
| wok | walk | ˈwɒk |
Nowhere is the shift more complex than in North American English. The presence of the merger and its absence are both found in many different regions of the North American continent, where it has been studied in greatest depth, and in both urban and rural environments. The symbols traditionally used to transcribe the vowels in the wordscot andcaught as spoken inAmerican English are ⟨ɑ⟩ and ⟨ɔ⟩, respectively, although their precisephonetic values may vary, as does the phonetic value of the merged vowel in the regions where the merger occurs.
Even without taking into account the mobility of the American population, the distribution of the merger is still complex; there are pockets of speakers with the merger in areas that lack it, and vice versa. There are areas where the merger has only partially occurred, or is in a state of transition. For example, based on research directed byWilliam Labov (using telephone surveys) in the 1990s, younger speakers inKansas,Nebraska, and theDakotas exhibited the merger while speakers older than 40 typically did not.[14][15] The 2003 Harvard Dialect Survey, in which subjects did not necessarily grow up in the place they identified as the source of their dialect features, indicates that there are speakers of both merging and contrast-preserving accents throughout the country, though the basic isoglosses are almost identical to those revealed by Labov's 1996 telephone survey. Both surveys indicate that, as of the 1990s, approximately 60% of American English speakers preserved the contrast, while approximately 40% merged the phonemes. Further complicating matters are speakers who merge the phonemes in some contexts but not others, or merge them when the words are spoken unstressed or casually but not when they are stressed.
Speakers with the merger in northeastern New England still maintain a phonemic distinction between a fronted and unrounded/ɑ/ (phonetically[ä]) and a back and usually rounded/ɔ/ (phonetically[ɒ]), because in northeastern New England (unlike in Canada and the Western United States), thecot–caught merger occurred without thefather–bother merger. Thus, although northeastern New Englanders pronounce bothcot andcaught as[kɒt], they pronouncecart as[kät].
Labov et al. also reveal that, for about 15% of respondents, a specific/ɑ/–/ɔ/ merger before/n/ but not before/t/ (or other consonants) is in effect, so thatDon anddawn are homophonous, butcot andcaught are not. In this case, a distinct vowel shift (which overlaps with thecot–caught merger for all speakers who have indeed completed thecot–caught merger) is taking place, identified as theDon–dawn merger.[16]
According to Labov, Ash, and Boberg,[17] the merger in North America is most strongly resisted in three regions:
In the three American regions above, sociolinguists have studied three phonetic shifts that can explain their resistance to the merger. The first is the fronting of/ɑ/ found in the Inland North, in which theLOT vowel/ɑ/ is advanced as far as the cardinal[a] (theopen front unrounded vowel), thus allowing theTHOUGHT vowel/ɔ/ to lower into the phonetic environment of[ɑ] without any merger taking place.[18] The second situation is the raising of theTHOUGHT vowel/ɔ/ found in Providence, New York City, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, in which the vowel is raised and diphthongized to[ɔə⁓oə], or, less commonly,[ʊə], thus keeping that vowel notably distinct from theLOT vowel/ɑ/.[18] The third situation occurs in the South, in whichvowel breaking results in/ɔ/ being pronounced as upgliding[ɒʊ], keeping it distinct from/ɑ/.[18] None of these three phonetic shifts, however, is certain to preserve the contrast for all speakers in these regions. Some speakers in all three regions, particularly younger ones, are beginning to exhibit the merger despite the fact that each region's phonetics should theoretically block it.[19][20][21]
African-American Vernacular English accents have traditionally resisted thecot–caught merger, withLOT pronounced[ɑ̈] andTHOUGHT traditionally pronounced[ɒɔ], though now often[ɒ~ɔə]. Early-2000s research has shown that this resistance may continue to be reinforced by the fronting ofLOT, linked through achain shift of vowels to the raising of theTRAP,DRESS, and perhapsKIT vowels. This chain shift is called the "African American Shift".[22] However, there is still evidence of AAVE speakers picking up thecot–caught merger inPittsburgh, Pennsylvania,[23] inCharleston, South Carolina,[24] in Florida and Georgia,[25] and in parts of California.[25]
In North America, the first evidence of the merger (or its initial conditions) comes from western Pennsylvania as far back as the data shows.[26] From there, it enteredUpper Canada (what is nowOntario). In the mid-19th century, the merger also independently began in eastern New England,[27] possibly influencing theCanadian Maritimes, though the merger is in evidence as early as the 1830s in both regions of Canada: Ontario and the Maritimes.[28] Fifty years later, the merger "was already more established in Canada" than in its two U.S. places of origin.[28] In Canadian English, further westward spread was completed more quickly than in English of the United States.
Two traditional theories of the merger's origins have been longstanding in linguistics: one group of scholars argues for an independent North American development, while others argue for contact-induced language change viaScots-Irish or Scottish immigrants to North America. In fact, both theories may be true but for different regions. The merger's appearance in western Pennsylvania is better explained as an effect of Scots-Irish settlement,[29] but in eastern New England,[27] and perhaps the American West,[30] as an internal structural development. Canadian linguistCharles Boberg considers the issue unresolved.[31] A third theory has been used to explain the merger's appearance specifically in northeastern Pennsylvania: an influx of Polish- and other Slavic-language speakers whoselearner English failed to maintain the distinction.[32]
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg) | This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding to it.(December 2016) |
Outside North America, another dialect featuring the merger is Scottish English, where the merged vowel has a quality around [ɔ̞].[33] Like in New England English, thecot–caught merger occurred without thefather–bother merger. Therefore, speakers still retain the distinction between/a/ inPALM and/ɔ/ inLOT–THOUGHT.[34]
The merger is also quite prevalent inIndian English, possibly due to contact with Scottish English.[citation needed] In particular, theLOT vowel may be lengthened to merge with theTHOUGHT vowel/ɒː/.[35] However, there are also speakers who maintain a distinction in length and/or quality.[36] Like in Scottish English, this vowel is not usually merged withPALM/ɑː/ in General Indian English.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)