Introduction

Acoustic properties of the monophthongs of Assamese Indian English speakers

“…Research supports the claim that Indian English has developed distinct norms, some of which seem to be shared widely across the country and treated as the model form (CIEFL, 1972; Cowie, 2007; Pandey, 2015; Sailaja, 2009; Wiltshire 2020). However, despite such shared target norms, undoubtedly a plethora of new English varieties have evolved in the Indian subcontinent, due to education level, L1 influences, degree of koineization especially in urban settings, and social and local identities such as ethnicity or religion (Kohli, 2017).…”

“…Some pairs of vowels in GIE contrast both in quality and duration, such as [u:] vs. [ʊ] and [i:] vs. [ɪ]. More recent descriptions generally agree with this inventory (Pandey, 2015; Sailaja, 2009).…”

“…According to standard descriptions (including CIEFL, 1972; Pandey, 2015; Sailaja, 2009; Wells, 1982), Indian English should contrast the tense and lax vowels in quality; that is, the front close vowels ( fleece‐kit), front mid vowels ( face‐dress), and back close vowels ( goose‐foot) should be produced with quality distinctions [i] vs. [ɪ], [e] vs. [ɛ], and [u] vs. [ʊ] respectively. The front mid‐open and open vowels ( dress‐trap) should also contrast, as [ɛ] vs. [æ], and standard models provide for a contrast in the central vowels between mid vowels [ʌ] or [ə] for strut‐nurse and a low vowel [a] for bath‐palm.…”

“…Wells (1982: 626) differs from most descriptions of Indian English in describing quantity contrasts as ‘not always consistently made’. As Assamese itself does not use durational contrasts in its vowel system, any length contrasts in Indian English result from the model as described by CIEFL (1972), Sailaja (2009), and Pandey (2015). Our tentative results suggest that while the durational differences are not significant, EM speakers may make a length as well as quality contrast for the vowels of fleece‐kit, goose‐foot, face‐dress and bath‐strut, while the AM speakers appear to use neither quality nor quantity.…”

“…Thus, in this study we not only describe the English monophthongs produced by L1 Assamese speakers but also examine whether and how this variety of English differs from Assamese (Dihingia, 2021; Mahanta, 2012), General Indian English (CIEFL, 1972; Pandey, 2015; Sailaja, 2009; Sarmah & Dihingia,2022 ; Wells 1982), Tibeto‐Burman Indian English (Wiltshire, 2005), and Indo‐Aryan Indian Englishes (Maxwell & Fletcher, 2009; Sirsa & Redford, 2013; Wiltshire & Harnsberger, 2006). Furthermore, we compare English‐medium and Assamese‐medium educated speakers to determine the effect of medium of education on their Indian English vowels.…”