2

Canonically, English is not a tonal language, and there are a number of posts on this site discussing why the use of rising tone in asking a question does not qualify (the reason being that it doesn't actually change the definitions of words).

This question is about something different. There is a well-known phenomenon called the "cot-caught merger" that concisely describes the pattern of sound changes that results in those two words being pronounced exactly the same. In general, a sound change pattern which results in different words becoming homophones is a merger, and a change which makes former homophones become differentiable is a split. What I'm asking about here is very similar to both these kinds of patterns, but involves a change in tone instead of (or maybe accompanying) a change in pronunciation.

"Cot" (and of course also "caught") don't actually always (to the best of my ability to assess) end the same way as do other similar words like "sit," "set," "note," etc.

'Sit,' 'set,' 'note' etc. all end in the unreleased 't' sound (IPA symbol is t with a 90 degree angle afterwards), but in certain contexts* 'cot' and 'caught' don't end in a consonant at all, but instead in a kind of upwardly pitched vowel sound. The vowel starts out with the "a" sound as in the words 'father' and 'bother,' which has the IPA symbol ɑ.

(Initially I had thought it then transitioned into a dipthong with some other vowel (possibly a shwa, the 'set' vowel or a short 'i' sound), but playing the audio from the interactive IPA chart for each of them sequentially, none of these really fits. So, this leads me to think that it is just the sharp rise in pitch which I was incorrectly perceiving as a dipthong.)

I'm not sure how one would accurately transcribe the word "cot" pronounced with the result of these changes, but here is an attempt:

kʰɑ with sudden upward pitch movement

This means that although the word effectively ends in a vowel, it is not pronounced the same as "caw," like the sound a crow makes. They have the same final dipthong (I believe) a very similar vowel sound, but while "caw" has a level tone, "cot" has a rising tone. So, I wouldn't confuse one for the other.

Is there a name for this phenomenon? It really seems like tone being the sole differentiator in a minimal pair.

EDIT: @tchrist has pointed out to me that the sound in "caw" is actually transcribed ɔ, which is different from the ɑ sound in "cot." I would have thought that "caw" would be kʰɑw, but I'm not very familiar with the IPA alphabet and may be making the kind of mistake which someone more experienced would not. If this is the case, I may have been mistaken about the rise in pitch being the only differentiator between the two words. But, it is the pitch change that distinguishes the pair in my ears, which may not be 100% accurate!

*I'll add a clarification of "some contexts" here, following from the discussion in the comments:

"Caught a fish" --> flapped 't' because the next word is a vowel

"There's a fish in my cot" --> has that rising pitch, where 'cot' is the last thing in the sentence

"Network" --> the 't' is dropped completely from the middle of the word

"Set square" --> I'm pretty sure the 't' is getting dropped because of the 's' after it, but the vowel in 'set' does not rise suddenly in pitch as a result of that

"This is a set." --> Unreleased 't' in 'set,' because nothing comes after it in the sentence. (also, level pitch)

"Caught" --> All on its own (no context): rising tone

"Caw," "Set" --> All on their own (no context): level tone

For the sake of avoiding confusion, I'll add that I don't put a rising pitch at the end of every sentence, as is done in some parts of California. This didn't seem relevant at the time I posted the question, since it was intended to be entirely about nomenclature, but I believe I pronounce things in a fairly standard GE (General American) or North Midlands accent but may also be influenced by more West Coast variants (like saying "soda" instead of "pop" or any of the alternatives).

Quack E. Duck
  • 285
  • 2
  • 2
  • 12
  • Of course, the two words are still spelled very differently! – Quack E. Duck Jan 04 '24 at 20:59
  • 1
    Asking for a term for this seems more like a [linguistics.se] question. – Barmar Jan 04 '24 at 21:13
  • 2
    I’m voting to close this question because Asking for a term for this seems more like a Linguistics question. – FumbleFingers Jan 04 '24 at 21:39
  • 4
    @FumbleFingers Questions about English phonetics are absolutely on topic here! Voting to reopen. – alphabet Jan 04 '24 at 22:22
  • 4
    Are you sure that the sound you're hearing at the end of "cot" isn't a glottal stop? (A glottal stop is the sound that the "-" makes in "uh-oh"; this is also, for most American speakers, the sound that "t" makes in "button.") – alphabet Jan 04 '24 at 22:24
  • 3
    You might also be hearing a difference in vowel length; the vowel in "cot" will be much shorter than the one in "caw" due to prefortis clipping. If you have recordings of this pronunciation it could also be helpful. – alphabet Jan 04 '24 at 22:28
  • 1
    Please use IPA to explain what you're talking about. Those of us who don't have your specific accent find it almost impossible to guess what you mean here. – tchrist Jan 04 '24 at 23:08
  • Thank you for all your suggestions so far, I will come back and edit this question tonight (will be busy at 6:10). There is definitely also a vowel length difference between cot (short) and caw (long), but if I deliberately 'stretch out' "cot" it still keeps the dipthong-like quality; it's not a pure vowel like the one in 'set.' I do sometimes omit "t" sounds entirely like "Hot Network Questions" becoming "Hot Ne'work Questions" so @alphabet you may be right but there is still something going on with the vowel and a rising tone (if I drop the t in 'set' it doesn't sound like a rising dipthong) – Quack E. Duck Jan 04 '24 at 23:52
  • And @tchrist I'll look up the relevant IPA symbols and will try to replace the "co^a" transcription with something more accurate. – Quack E. Duck Jan 04 '24 at 23:53
  • I know there's a recognized pattern where the long i sound becomes two syllables (I do this too, as matter of fact) like in "pile" --> pie-yul, "inquire" --> in-qui-yer, etc. But, "cot" doesn't gain a whole extra syllable, and there is still the question of what to call the tone difference. Again, I'll edit this tonight to be more clear. – Quack E. Duck Jan 04 '24 at 23:58
  • 1
    @QuackE.Duck I think we need not so much an IPA transcription as a recording; you might be able to find a similar pronunciation on YouGlish. Also: what dialect/accent do you speak? Are you a native speaker? – alphabet Jan 05 '24 at 00:10
  • 1
    I know no accents in which FATHER has the “rounded a” you mention. FATHER is canonically [ˈfɑðɚ] with the unrounded low back vowel, as in Khan. However, there are accents where words like Ma, Pa, Grandpa end in a rounded vowel, shown written in eye-dialect as Maw, Paw, Grandpaw, which would be the [ɔ] monophthong, ɴᴏᴛ some [ɑw] diphthong like loud. BOTHER is unrounded only if you’ve ʙᴏᴛʜ the LOT–CLOTH split ᴀɴᴅ the FATHER–BOTHER merger, but [ɒ ~ ɔ] otherwise. Crows’ caws are normally [kʰɔz]. Caught a ball wouldn’t drop the /t/ but might flap it to make [ˌkʰɔɾəˈbɔɫ]. – tchrist Jan 05 '24 at 00:24
  • 1
    Oh, apparently there are some older U.S. East Coast(ish) accents that actually do have "round a" in FATHER and such. Interesting. – tchrist Jan 05 '24 at 01:30
  • @tchrist That was very helpful, and has shown me I've used some incorrect terminology in attempting to describe sounds. By "rounded 'a'" I meant to contrast with "flat 'a'" as in cat, bag, and apple. But, it looks like it has a more specific meaning than that which was not what I meant. "Lot" and "cloth" have the same vowel sound to me, and I'm not sure what the split would sound like. Also, if 'cot' comes before another word starting with a vowel I would definitely flap the 't': for the rising dipthong thing I was thinking of the word either in isolation or at the end of the sentence. – Quack E. Duck Jan 05 '24 at 04:07
  • @alphabet yes, I'm a native speaker, and pretty sure I'm using a fairly standard set of pronunciations. So, General American? Someone posted a map of different dialects which leads me to believe it might be specifically North Midlands, but may also be influenced by the west coast (like, I do say "soda" instead of any of the alternatives). – Quack E. Duck Jan 05 '24 at 04:10
  • @All Edited with clarifications, but if I've added too much extraneous detail, feel free to edit it back out. – Quack E. Duck Jan 05 '24 at 05:05
  • 2
    @QuackE.Duck When you say that the "t" is "dropped" from the middle of the word "network," you mean that it's glottalized, right? – alphabet Jan 05 '24 at 05:07
  • 1
    Anyway, I think we'd need recordings (or a very narrow phonetic transcription) to figure out what you mean. – alphabet Jan 05 '24 at 05:08
  • @alphabet I believe so? The word keeps its distinct two syllables and the first one gets cut off abruptly before the "w," but as I said I'm not 100% proficient in phonetics terminology. – Quack E. Duck Jan 05 '24 at 05:12
  • @alphabet I don't even like listening to recordings of myself, never mind posting one on the Internet for everyone to hear XD ... But, tomorrow I'll take a look and see if I can find an existing audio sample (from a dictionary, or maybe YouTube) where someone pronounces "caught" in the same way as I was attempting to describe. Thank you for the suggestion: I do believe that would be much clearer. – Quack E. Duck Jan 05 '24 at 05:17
  • 2
    @QuackE.Duck That "cut off abruptly" sound is a glottal stop. But yes, recordings would help us solve this mystery. – alphabet Jan 05 '24 at 05:31
  • 1
    You may wish to study the text and maps here. Even if you have the same vowel in lot and cloth, we don't know if that vowel is FATHER’s unrounded [ɑ], the traditional "slightly rounded" [ɒ] of CLOTH, or the more rounded [ɔ] of THOUGHT or clawed: all can be found in different American dialects. Most of the North Midlands does not have the same vowel for these, let alone an unrounded one, but some places do. Yet Pittsburgh and Omaha differ greatly, while Milwaukee and Rochester lack any such merger. – tchrist Jan 05 '24 at 05:49
  • We're still liable to pronounce/use words in a tiny bit of a Scottish way, for example, even though we can hardly understand all their English without captions. But all pronunciation maps will beome spottier over time; we don't need a boat to get there anymore. BTW, we say cot, bot, jot; caw, law, jaw; caught, bought, sought… Yep, no green dots where we live…yet. – HippoSawrUs Jan 06 '24 at 01:12
  • @tchrist That map really has a lot going on! Related to the article, there was another interesting question here https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/289098/can-you-hear-the-difference-between-writer-and-rider-why about the difference between "writer" and "rider," and I was surprised to learn that not everyone uses two different vowel sounds there. (Cool, I just realized you're the one who wrote the accepted answer to the question!) So, "writer" definitely has the raised vowel, but I don't say "aboot" for "about" and haven't heard that from anyone that isn't actually from Canada. – Quack E. Duck Jan 07 '24 at 06:12
  • While trying to find good audio samples to clarify the "rising pitch" question, I came across something interesting in the dictionary pronunciations for cot https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cot and caught https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caught When the reader says "cot," I don't hear that upward shift at all, but it sounds like he's using pretty much the same vowel sound I do (maybe a tiny bit flatter?). But, when he reads "caught," it does have that ascending sound (subtly) at the end, right before the 't,' but it's also a much rounder vowel than I would use. – Quack E. Duck Jan 07 '24 at 06:16
  • So, imagine the flatter vowel sound from Merriam-Webster's "cot," combined with the dipthong-y quality of their recording of "caught," but with a bigger change in pitch at the end. – Quack E. Duck Jan 07 '24 at 06:24
  • Maybe it's actually the sound from their pronunciation of "cloth"? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cloth Thanks for the suggestion @tchrist – Quack E. Duck Jan 07 '24 at 06:34
  • All other things being equal, caw and cot have different endings so in any case, it's hard to confuse them just due to that. – Lambie Feb 17 '24 at 19:59

1 Answers1

1

After coming across this question and its answers, I believe Greg Lee has provided a relevant explanation of what's actually happening:

"The /t/ phoneme of English has neutral vowel color -- it's not palatalized, velarized, or rounded. In pronunciation, how do you get from the palatal vowel /æ/ to the neutral /t/, at the end of very same syllable? You have to [...] insert a glide reflecting the change in tongue position going from palatal to nonpalatal position. It's just mechanical." (emphasis added)

While the OP of that question was asking about the word "cat," not "cot," it seems like this could be the same phenomenon. Then, the "rising pitch" I believed I was hearing at the end of "cot" would actually just be the sliding dipthong-y "glide" into the (unreleased, and therefore almost inaudible) 't' sound. Because the glide stands out more than the final consonant, this caused me to mis-perceive the word as ending in a vowel sound and having no final consonant at all.

(For what it's worth, I do also pronounce "cat" with an added glide, but no glide in "catloaf" since there's no 't' sound for the 'æ' to transition into as it's dropped before the 'l.' This is why I'm fairly certain Greg Lee's explanation is the answer to my question as well.)

Quack E. Duck
  • 285
  • 2
  • 2
  • 12