- Mark Reed wrote:
>Judging from the replies, it appears to be free variation (or personal/dialectal idiosyncracy?) between [a~g] and [aNg]; probably in the latter the a is still nasalized, at least somewhat......(and I suspect even in the former, there might be an intrusive [N] as the velum closes for the g).
> I've learned a lot about português pronunciation.
> I'm still confused
> about the <ang> though. Is there a [N] anywhere, or
> is it pronounced
> the same as if it were spelled <ãg>?
The only real free variation in AmEngl. I can think if is "economic(s), economical" with initial [i] or [E], often in the same discourse. Other alternants, like "either" ['iDr=] ~ ['aiDr=] or "tomato" [t@'meyto ~ t@'mAto] seem to be regional, maybe even class features.
- Various people commented:
--- On Wed, 2/4/09, <deinx nxtxr> <deinx.nxtxr@...> wrote:
> > <romiltz@...> wrote:
> > > Ah yes, same here. Some people also vary
> "root" [rUt ~ rut] but I
> > > think that may be regional usage ([rut])
> conflicting with
> > more "standard" [rUt].
> > I didn't know [rUt] was considered the more
> > pronunciation of "root". It's
> definitely [rut] around here.
> [rut] for me too. "route" and variants are
> definitely [raUt], except maybe
> for the famous song "Route 66".
On due consideration, perhaps I was being Midwest-o-centric...? It's likely [rut] is more widespread than Midwest [rUt].