Are english certification exams strict on the use of British/American English?

[sapo931]

Hi everybody

I am planning to take the CAE Cambridge Test next year, but I was wondering if the grading (even in other certification exams) is influenced by the use of Britsh and American English simultaneously (i.e. using idiomatic phrases from the two languages).
Since I (we) am surrounded by both of them on tv, internet, movies, books, etc, I have some difficulties in creating a mental structure that define a boundary line.
Theoretically "Standard English[nota]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_English[/nota]" should be used in written comunications, but in novel books/internet/movies it is seldomly so.

What do you suggest?

[ROMA911]

"DavideGenova":[quote="ROMA91"]I simply noticed that one can still listen to American pronunciations of - e.g. - words like "sorry" being uttered with - let's say - an "open o". Which simply means that - so far - merging has not been completely generalized in the States.

You are right, notwithstanding the pressure from General American, the standard, which does merge historical /ɒ/, still retained in England in rock, and /ɑ:/, there are some local varieties that have kept the distinction, for example on the North-Eastern coast. Nevertheless, there even are varieties, both of General American English and non-standard ones, where the cot-caught merger applies and not only cot, but also caught (cfr. here: Mrs. anakat's pronunciation merges cot-caught), otherwise phonologically /kɔt/ and phonetically something like [kɔ:t] (Mr. ge556 does not merge) -see below-, are virtually indistinguishable from British cart.
As to sorry, the issue is more complicated and the /'sɔrɪ/ form is the standard one in the USA, often realised as ['sɔ:rɪ], where [ɔ:] is like a long Italian open ò or a lengthened British /ɒ/ of /'sɒrɪ/ -I have seen phonetic transcription of it as [ɒ:], ['sɒ:ri]-, rather than the closer British [ɔ:], because General American, in front of -r-, sometimes maps historical /ɒ/ into /ɑ/ and sometimes into /ɔ/, cfr. here.
Some IPA fonts are available here. I used them before discovering Linux and using the fonts in the repositories.[/quote]

Thanks for the quoted examples and the indication as to fonts. Anyway, Italian Colleagues not so greedy to get deeper into American phonetics shouldn't be afraid in approaching spoken American language. They simply do no need to be selective and accept [ɔ], [ɒ] or [ɑ] where spelling reports "o". The more one travels and gets in touch with different people in the States, the more this kind of variability increases. Getting accustomed to it does prove really useful. Length shouldn't be an issue because - actually, as Italian speakers - we don't use it in automatized (= implicit) recognition mechanisms. Mental - and, in this case, also vocal - flexibility is key not only in learnig linear algebra, but even in thorough comprehension of foreign languages. Web links and indications regarding authors and books have been provided.

[vict85]

Anyway, you will speak with an examiner, who resides in Italy for a while and probably teaches English for living. He/She is used to "Italian English" and understands it quite well. Anyway, if you like Canepari's Style, you may learn his "International English" (Pronuncia inglese per italiani[nota]Io possiedo solo quello sull'Italiano.[/nota]).

[DavideGenova1]

"ROMA91":I simply noticed that one can still listen to American pronunciations of - e.g. - words like "sorry" being uttered with - let's say - an "open o". Which simply means that - so far - merging has not been completely generalized in the States.

You are right, notwithstanding the pressure from General American, the standard, which does merge historical /ɒ/, still retained in England in rock, and /ɑ:/, there are some local varieties that have kept the distinction, for example on the North-Eastern coast. Nevertheless, there even are varieties, both of General American English and non-standard ones, where the cot-caught merger applies and not only cot, but also caught (cfr. here: Mrs. anakat's pronunciation merges cot-caught), otherwise phonologically /kɔt/ and phonetically something like [kɔ:t] (Mr. ge556 does not merge) -see below-, are virtually indistinguishable from British cart.
As to sorry, the issue is more complicated and the /'sɔrɪ/ form is the standard one in the USA, often realised as ['sɔ:rɪ], where [ɔ:] is like a long Italian open ò or a lengthened British /ɒ/ of /'sɒrɪ/ -I have seen phonetic transcription of it as [ɒ:], ['sɒ:ri]-, rather than the closer British [ɔ:], because General American, in front of -r-, sometimes maps historical /ɒ/ into /ɑ/ and sometimes into /ɔ/, cfr. here.
Some IPA fonts are available here. I used them before discovering Linux and using the fonts in the repositories.

[ROMA911]

"DavideGenova":[quote="ROMA91"]What could be defined as an "open American o" - as, for instance, in "rock" - does not correspond - actually - to British "a" as in "star"|

I think you are right because the opposition between historically long and short vowels concerns much more the quality than the length of the sounds in American English, but long realisations of /ɑ/ are commonly attested for example in Canepari's English Pronunciations too, mostly without establishing any phonological contrast with the short sound [ɑ], merging the realisation domains of American /ɑ/ (or /ɑ:/) and British /ɑ:/. [/quote]

Actually, we are not saying different things. We are simply based on different, but valid, stand-points. I didn't mean to completely exclude such pronunciations as the one you mentioned. I simply noticed that one can still listen to American pronunciations of - e.g. - words like "sorry" being uttered with - let's say - an "open o". Which simply means that - so far - merging has not been completely generalized in the States.

What you wrote as to the trend regarding the change of opposition between length and quality is quite interesting because one can see similarities with the process - allegedly achieved in Italian and other neo-latin languages since more than one millennium - which led to different pronunciation of vowels - at least in standard Italian - based on length differences in Latin language.

"DavideGenova":As you know there are non-rhotic dialects, in particular some varieties of conservative Afro-American Southern English, where for example Charlie is pronounced as in British English and, in order to show such a pronunciation, is spelt Cholly. If we take that into account, it is clear that mixing American and British pronunciation can lead to an ununderstandable speech.

Yes, sometimes actually "ununderstandable", but in many occasions simply "not accepted" by listening people - and not because of linguistic reasons or lack of comprehension ( pride and/or prejudice involved? ) -

P.S.: do you know whether standard I.P.A. or Canepari's fonts are available on the net?

[DavideGenova1]

"ROMA91":What could be defined as an "open American o" - as, for instance, in "rock" - does not correspond - actually - to British "a" as in "star"|

I think you are right because the opposition between historically long and short vowels concerns much more the quality than the length of the sounds in American English, but long realisations of /ɑ/ are commonly attested for example in Canepari's English Pronunciations too, mostly without establishing any phonological contrast with the short sound [ɑ], merging the realisation domains of American /ɑ/ (or /ɑ:/) and British /ɑ:/. As you know there are non-rhotic dialects, in particular some varieties of conservative Afro-American Southern English, where for example Charlie is pronounced as in British English and, in order to show such a pronunciation, is spelt Cholly. If we take that into account, it is clear that mixing American and British pronunciation can lead to an ununderstandable speech.

[ROMA911]

"DavideGenova":[quote="ROMA91"]Really sorry for being intrusive . . .

Any contribution is useful to sapo93 and any other reader! Thank you for it.

"ROMA91":whilst the first sillable of "hominy" is not. Length is phonologically distinctive in English

General American, and all the Northern American local dialects I have some knowledge about, keep the phonological discrimination between historically long and short phonemes much more as a difference of quality than quantity, so hominy can well be phonologically transcribed /'hɑmənɪ/. The dictionaries I have seen around write the American English sound corrsponding to phoneme /ɑ/ as [ɑ:], a long vowel, and, similarly, /i/ (which contrasts /ɪ/) as [i:] and /u/ (contrasting /ʊ/) as [u:], so hominy is phonetically transcribed as ['hɑ:məni], at least very often, cfr. here, corresponding to a widespread realisation of the phoneme /ɑ/. As to harmony Mr. TopQuark's pronunciation of here.[/quote]

Thanks for your patience! What should I say? As to American and British English even transcriptions written by native authors are - usually - rather poor and - as a consequence - misleading. What could be defined as an "open American o" - as, for instance, in "rock" - does not correspond - actually - to British "a" as in "star", "car", "castle" or even "command" and not only as to length. The actual sound is different and one can realize when listening. Ears should be trained, of course! Transcriptions used by native authors include an inadequate and insufficient amount of symbols and do not manage in grabbing and showing the real pronunciation they would aim to describe. The only Italian author I know that reliably deals with these issues is Canepari and his works - at least in my opinion and, perhaps, not only in mine - are even more complete and reliable than books written by native authors. The same happens if one should like reading about Shakesperian pronunciation. The top is and remains Cercignani's works and even English academicians study on them. Believe it or not, the Italian authors I quoted are many steps forward in studying English phonetics than native - American and English -academicians. Try and you'll believe|

[DavideGenova1]

"ROMA91":Really sorry for being intrusive . . .

Any contribution is useful to sapo93 and any other reader! Thank you for it.

"ROMA91":whilst the first sillable of "hominy" is not. Length is phonologically distinctive in English

General American, and all the Northern American local dialects I have some knowledge about, keep the phonological discrimination between historically long and short phonemes much more as a difference of quality than quantity, so hominy can well be phonologically transcribed /'hɑmənɪ/. The dictionaries I have seen around write the American English sound corrsponding to phoneme /ɑ/ as [ɑ:], a long vowel, and, similarly, /i/ (which contrasts /ɪ/) as [i:] and /u/ (contrasting /ʊ/) as [u:], so hominy is phonetically transcribed as ['hɑ:məni], at least very often, cfr. here, corresponding to a widespread realisation of the phoneme /ɑ/. As to harmony Mr. TopQuark's pronunciation of here.

[ROMA911]

"DavideGenova":Just my pennyworth: the borders between the dialects of English in what concerns idioms and vocabulary are increasingly getting blurred due to globalisation and the strong presence of American English in the media. Nevertheless, mixing orthographies is universally regarded as improper and mixing pronunciations can really prevent other people to understand you. American hominy and British harmony sound the same...

Really sorry for being intrusive . . . Anyway I hope you won't get too angry with me . . .

Not quite. The specific phonemes are different in American as compared to British English and there is a difference even in length.
The first sillable in "harmony" is long - ha: - in British English, whilst the first sillable of "hominy" is not. Length is phonologically distinctive in English, though not in Italian language. Where only doubling consonants is phonologically distinctive.

In this occurrence, the length in "harmony" stands for the loss of the "-r" phoneme. Still pronounced in American English and in non-standard rural varieties in Britain. Where the usage is declining, though.

I apologize . . .

[DavideGenova1]

Just my pennyworth: the borders between the dialects of English in what concerns idioms and vocabulary are increasingly getting blurred due to globalisation and the strong presence of American English in the media. Nevertheless, mixing orthographies is universally regarded as improper and mixing pronunciations can really prevent other people to understand you. American hominy and British harmony sound the same...

[Epimenide93]

I totally agree with vict85's analysis.

"sapo93":[quote="wrugg25"]
prounouncing the words as they're meant to be prounounced.

that is part of the problem, since some words have different pronunciation based upon the speaker's provenience and dialect.
If I hear more then one pronunciation, I usually chose the easiest for me (an italian) to remeber and use correctly.[/quote]

This should not be a problem. You must pay attention non to mispronounce words (a beach does not bark ), the accent doesn't matter.

"sapo93":
I asked this because of a talk with a friend of mine, who study English at university. She was of the opinion that, going up in the exam level, things like British pronunciations, lack of strong foreign accent and use of British idiomatic phrases would became more and more important in the grading.

I really don't think so. Maybe this changes from one certification to another. I know IELTS and TOEFL are quite neutral, if you have a foreign accent (it shouldn't be strong just not to mispronounce words) i know it is by no mean a problem.

"sapo93":
I remeber that in a tv show (maybe David Letterman's one, but I am not sure), British actors where asked to explain a given idiomatic phrase of American English. Most of them failed miserably. Since I use both the idioms without a separation, it may be posssible that the examiner isn't familiar with the particular expression, marking it as an error.

This is very unlikely, unless you don't use words/expressions belonging to the slang, which is anyway an error. During an examination you are supposed to be formal. If an idiomatic phrase is sufficiently formal, it should be largely understood too.

"sapo93":how was the test? How did you fare?

The test was quite standard. I got an overall band score of 7.0. I should have spent more time doing simulation of the writing test, the British Council gives you a lot of free material for you to prepare, but during the month before the test I hadn't enough time to do so.

My only suggestion, no matter what test you want to do, is to train as much as you can, and to train specifically for the test you are going to do. Even if your English is good, that's not enough, you have to know exactly what to expect from the test.

[walter.ruggeri.3]

"vict85":
I'm not able to find it now, but, in the past, I searched for some information about CPE — even though I'm far from that level — and I read they judge your intonation. The point is, you can choose to speak in American, Scottish or Australian English but you have to be coherent in that choice. You have to use the American English vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar and so on. At least in the CPE. Anyway, a well-structured discourse and a well-made choice of words are much more important. A wide vocabulary is also appreciated, and probably they like a candidate who uses phrasal verbs correctly. Even an accurate intonation across the sentence is probably more important than the exact British pronunciation of a single word.

Everything you wrote about the CPE exam fits perfectly the CAE one, too

"sapo93":
If I may, how was the test? How did you fare?

The exam was not really difficult... but the stereo we were provided with to listen to the audio tracks related to the listening part did not work properly, and so all my mates and I had our final grades lowered by the mistakes made during the listening test

[vict85]

"sapo93":[quote="wrugg25"]
prounouncing the words as they're meant to be prounounced.

that is part of the problem, since some words have different pronunciation based upon the speaker's provenience and dialect.
If I hear more then one pronunciation, I usually chose the easiest for me (an italian) to remeber and use correctly.[/quote]

I'm not able to find it now, but, in the past, I searched for some information about CPE — even though I'm far from that level — and I read they judge your intonation. The point is, you can choose to speak in American[nota]Actually, there is more than one American English.[/nota], Scottish or Australian English but you have to be coherent in that choice. You have to use the American English vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar and so on. At least in the CPE. Anyway, a well-structured discourse and a well-made choice of words are much more important. A wide vocabulary is also appreciated, and probably they like a candidate who uses phrasal verbs correctly. Even an accurate intonation across the sentence is probably more important than the exact British pronunciation of a single word.

[sapo931]

"wrugg25":
prounouncing the words as they're meant to be prounounced.

that is part of the problem, since some words have different pronunciation based upon the speaker's provenience and dialect.
If I hear more then one pronunciation, I usually chose the easiest for me (an italian) to remeber and use correctly.

I asked this because of a talk with a friend of mine, who study English at university. She was of the opinion that, going up in the exam level, things like British pronunciations, lack of strong foreign accent and use of British idiomatic phrases would became more and more important in the grading.
I remeber that in a tv show (maybe David Letterman's one, but I am not sure), British actors where asked to explain a given idiomatic phrase of American English. Most of them failed miserably. Since I use both the idioms without a separation, it may be posssible that the examiner isn't familiar with the particular expression, marking it as an error.

"Epimenide93":I recently took the IELTS certification after a brief preparation course, and the lecturer told us that coherence affects the score, since is one of the aspects upon which the score you get in the productive skills is based. So, even if doesn't really matter if you follow British English or U.S. English standards, it is of some relevance for you to stick to your style. Even so, it is important to underline that the influence that this kind of incoherence has on the score is not that relevant. I mean, certainly they pay attention to your style, but it's not something like that, that will relevantly affect your score. I'm quite sure you can go ahead and do the test without even thinking about this, unless you are planning to get a 8.5-9 band (the bands usually given to cultured native speakers).

The CAE should corrispond to a grade between 6.5(7) and 8 in the IELTS, so I believe it starts to be something to ponder about
http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/images/ ... scores.pdf

"Epimenide93":I recently took the IELTS certification after a brief preparation course

"wrugg25":By the way, my words are not due to some sort of pretentiousness: I passed the CAE exam a few months ago

If I may, how was the test? How did you fare?

[Epimenide93]

I recently took the IELTS certification after a brief preparation course, and the lecturer told us that coherence affects the score, since is one of the aspects upon which the score you get in the productive skills is based. So, even if doesn't really matter if you follow British English or U.S. English standards, it is of some relevance for you to stick to your style. Even so, it is important to underline that the influence that this kind of incoherence has on the score is not that relevant. I mean, certainly they pay attention to your style, but it's not something like that, that will relevantly affect your score. I'm quite sure you can go ahead and do the test without even thinking about this, unless you are planning to get a 8.5-9 band (the bands usually given to cultured native speakers).

[walter.ruggeri.3]

I think you're overcomplicating the thing: you must be able to speak english correctly, respecting every grammar rule you need to use, prounouncing the words as they're meant to be prounounced... those are the important things: it does not matter if you use "american" words or constructs instead of "british" ones, as long as the constructs you use are grammatically correct


By the way, my words are not due to some sort of pretentiousness: I passed the CAE exam a few months ago