Northern vowel features within the deep south: The new orleans yat dialect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linguists have noted the distinctively Northern sound of the White, working class New Orleans English dialect locally referred to as Yat, though the features of this dialect have not been well documented phonetically. Vowel features attested include a split short-a system, BOUGHT raising, and Canadian raising of /ɑʊ/—common to Northeastern dialects but rare within the American South. In this study, I analyze the realization of these sounds within a corpus of interviews, reading passages, and word lists completed with 57 local Yat speakers, situating Yat within broader American English trends. Results indicate that in comparison to descriptions of these features in Northeastern dialects, the Yat split short-a system features slightly different phonetic triggers, BOUGHT is less raised and diphthongal, and Canadian raising appears to occur across the diphthong and not just in the nucleus. Thus, while these features do resemble those found in Northeastern dialects, there are some local distinctions. Moreover, BOUGHT raising and the split short-a system are in decline amongst younger speakers, while Canadian raising is a relatively recent innovation within the New Orleans area. Thus, Yat will likely remain a peculiar dialect within the South, despite its changing qualities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".