On the other hand, many persons unvoice final voiced consonants almost or quite completely, making them indistinct and sometimes changing the meaning of a word.

C. Assimilations Classified as to Place of Articulation

1. In Forming Consonants

Originally the [n] in sink was a genuine [n], but as a result of the influence of the [k] the post-dental nasal [n] was drawn back to the velar position, and in this way the word gained its modern pronunciation [sınk]. The word Lincoln is another example of this form of assimilation, that is, the substitution of the velar nasal [n] for the post-dental nasal [n]; some persons, however, in an attempt to follow the spelling, use the post-dental nasal. Angry is another example of the velarization of [n] under the influence of [g], being pronounced [æŋgrı]. Words having the prefix in- followed by a velar sometimes have the velarized nasal, especially in rapid speech; an example of this is the word incompatible, sometimes pronounced [inkǝmpætəbl].

The opposite assimilation, that is, from [ŋ] to [n], occurs in the words length and strength as pronounced by many Americans and most Scotch people. H. C. Wyld, in his History of Modern Colloquial English, says that [lenge] is so frequently [len] in Scotland that the word has become the Scottish shibboleth. This pronunciation, however, is not considered good either in America or in Scotland.

The word virtue [v3(r)tju] is frequently assimilated to [v3(r)tSu], since the post-dental [S] is more easily made after [t] than the palatal [j]. This assimilation is generally accepted as justifiable in rapid colloquial speech. Many persons prefer the unassimilated form in reading poetry or formal prose and in public speaking. The assimilation of [ɛdjukerSǝn] (education) to [ɛdzǝkersən] is considered by many as rather slovenly even in rapid speech.

In the compound horseshoe the [S] in [Su] assimilates the s in [ho(r)s] to [S], and the word is pronounced with one prolonged [S]. The same assimilation frequently occurs in such expressions as Miss Shaw [missɔ:], has she [hæzsi] or [hæSSi], etc. Often in very rapid speech these expressions are still further simplified to [mısə:], [hæsi], or [hæzi]. These last two assimilations are not recommended.

An expression like "I shall miss you," if spoken very quickly, illustrates the way in which two sounds mutually influence each other (reciprocal assimilation). The s in [mis] is attracted to the [S] position under the influence of the palatal [j]; this [j], meanwhile, is drawn forward to the [S] position and unvoiced under the influence of the [s]; so that we have the pronunciation [missu]. Similarly, Miss Young becomes [mISSAN].

English speakers are inclined to avoid this type of assimilation, even to the point of pronouncing issue [isju]. In American speech such assimilations have excellent, though unconscious, authority. At a recent Phi Beta Kappa dinner one of our most distinguished scholars spoke of his Alma Mater as [ouldzeil]. Here the palatal [j] was assimilated to the post-dental [3] under the influence of the preceding [d]. In spite of such authority, however, these assimilations suggest careless articulation and are not recommended.

Such assimilations as [oʊpm] for [oʊpn] (open), [beikŋ] for [berkn] (bacon), [ai kŋ goʊ] for [aı kən goʊ] (I can go), are sometimes heard but are not accepted pronunciations.

In a word like clean [kli:n], the post-dental [1] draws the velar [k] forward and is in turn drawn backward by this [k] until they meet at a point half way between their normal points of articulation. Careless speakers sometimes assimilate these sounds differently. They substitute the postdental plosive for the velar plosive, so that the word becomes [tlin]. This change, however, is so slight that only trained ears would perceive it.

2. In Forming Vowels

phoneticians confine Vowels, however, are

In discussing assimilation many themselves to changes in consonants. influenced by the adjacent sounds even more than consonants, though these changes are so subtle that they are less easily perceived. For instance, there is a different form of the vowel in each of the words bet [bet], bed [bed], and bell [bel]; but the difference is too slight for the untrained ear to observe, and the same phonetic symbol is used for all three, that is, they are regarded as being in the same phoneme group.

In the words just mentioned it is the succeeding consonant that causes the change. When the vowel [a] is preceded by a lip-rounded consonant [w] or [hu], it is difficult to unround the lips instantly, as has already been explained, and the unrounded [a] is rounded to [o] or [p], as in water [wotǝ], want [wont], was [wpz], what [hunt], quality [kwoliti], Washington [wpSintǝn], etc. In certain parts of the country liprounding does not occur in all these cases: for instance, one often hears the word Washington pronounced [wasıntǝn]. In regard to this type of assimilation E. H. Sturtevant, in his Linguistic Change (page 75), says that in Shakespeare's time the use in England was also vacillating and that wanting rhymed with granting. "In the nineteenth century," he continues, "the modern pronunciation of such words was the common one, but many people kept the old sound in certain words such as wart, warp, waddle, wad, wallop. For the last hundred years or so the standard English pronunciation has constantly employed the sound-group [wo] or [wn], for the earlier [wa]; whereas the change was irregular in the eighteenth century it was regular in the nineteenth. In American English the irregularity still persists. Some of us say [a] in the words [wadl], [wad], [walǝp]; many of us in [was] (wash); and most of us in [watǝ] (water). Probably

American English will eventually work its way to uniformity as the English of the mother country has already done." There is, however, another influence which may prevent this-our tendency to unround the [w]. This is a part of a very widespread drift in our American speech which is practically doing away with lip-rounding. If this continues, all [o]'s and [p]'s will tend to become [a]'s. At present, however, the pronunciations [was] and [watǝ] for wash and water strike many Americans as provincial.

It has already been said that pronouncing the postdentals [t], [d], [n], [1], [r], with the tongue turned back to the hard palate greatly changes the adjacent vowels. Examples of this vowel change are seen in the pronunciations of such words as American, very, lyric, spirit, telephone, lady, when these words are pronounced with inversions of the consonant. It is easy to perceive this assimilation of the vowels to the inverted position of the consonants in reading the following sentence with the tip of the tongue turned back to the hard palate in forming all post-dentals:

bihoʊld də liliz ǝv də fild haʊ der groʊ | dei toil not niðər du der spin | jet ai sei înțʊ ju dəṭ şöləmən ın əl hız gləri wǝz not ǝreid laik wan ǝa diz |·|

Similarly, the use of an initial dark [1] changes the following vowel. In general, any faulty formation of the consonants has a marked effect upon the character of the contiguous vowels.

D. Assimilations Classified as to Manner of Articulation or Emission of Breath

1. Changes Affecting Plosive Combinations

(a) Two Consecutive Plosives.-When a plosive is doubled, as in the word bookcase, there are not really two steps, but one, made with a prolongation of the pause between the

closure and the release. In this word bookcase, for instance, the first [k] is represented by the pressure of the back of the tongue against the hard palate; the closure is held for a relatively long time; then comes the release, which represents the second [k]. Compare [bʊkkers] with [bʊker] (bouquet).

A similar modification occurs with two different plosives, whether they occur in the same words as [æpt] (apt), [askt] (asked), [sægd] (sagged), [rpbd] (robbed), or in two consecutive words as [hot drink] (hot drink), [big kæts] (big cats), [sæd keis] (sad case).

This form of assimilation may be briefly defined thus: when two plosives follow one another, only one explosion takes place, the first consonant being represented by the closure, and the second by the release. This assimilation is according to the phonetic principle that "when two consecutive sounds have certain articulatory movements in common, these movements are generally executed only once."

(b) A Plosive Followed by a Lateral.-When a plosive is followed by a lateral, the plosive is not released in the usual way: it is held for an instant, and the air is then emitted at the sides of the tongue. An instance of this is heard in the word [Satl] (shuttle); here we have the pressure for the [t] and the lateral release for the [1]. In this case, since the tip of the tongue is in the same place for both, it naturally does not change for the [1]. In [fıkl] (fickle), however, the closure is made with the back of the tongue against the soft palate and without the vibration of the vocal cords; the tip is then pressed against the teeth ridge, the vocal cords are brought into vibration, and the voiced breath is released at the sides of the tongue. In the word [erbl] (able) the air is checked at the lips and then released at the sides of the tongue and at the lips simultaneously. In all these cases it is difficult for untrained muscles to make this articulation quickly and smoothly, and for that reason the words in