3 ms·
I think what laumars was referring to was the pronunciation of the first vowel in Karl and Carol. In other words, both dialects have a schwa inserted (even in
by kafkaesque 14y ago
I think what laumars was referring to was the pronunciation of the first vowel in Karl and Carol.
In other words, both dialects have a schwa inserted (even in NA English), but the difference is that Scottish people do not differentiate between the 'a' in both Karl and Carol.
Put differently, Scottish people pronounce Karl and Carol the same way to an English speaker (from England).
What I'm saying is that to my Canadian ear, I could hear a difference between the few Scottish people I've spoken to in Canada. But come to think of it, they were probably Canadianised.
- ithkuil 14y agoThe thread started off about rhoticism ("[...]heavy on the R's [...]"), so I guess he reinterpreted the r+schwa as longer r. However, the key player here is not laumars, but his friend Carol :-) I mean, the interesting part is that she heard her name because the epenthesis process transformed a monosyllabic word into disyllabic one, and that changed the shape of the word: kar(uh)l has the same rhythm as carol, and small vowel quality differences are probably less important that the rhythm when the word gets parsed by the brain.