Perhaps I need to correct my habit of being defensive, but I genuinely do not see how I’m reading into anything in particular. She, not I, said that the two sorts of long vowels may function slightly differently since the second kana can take the accent. She, not I, said that different speakers may handle the two ways of writing the long ‘O’ vowel different. The only bit of extrapolation I made was that of using the word ‘idiolect’, whose definition I have already clarified. Based on the definition I have, she is simply postulating that differences exist at the individual level, which is to say the ‘idiolectal’ level. If I am making a mistake in my definitions, please tell me, because I have the impression that you have a background in linguistics, which I most certainly do not. I just happen to know quite a bit of grammatical terminology as a result of studying languages and I like to use these terms to keep my thoughts organised. ‘Idiolect’ is a new word to me. I had to look it up in Oxford when @alo used it. I attempt to present my views and whatever I serendipitously find with as much accuracy and fairness as possible, even if I will undoubtedly use evidence to support my stand on a particular issue if I can. If I have indeed made some gravely baseless assumption that would risk intellectual dishonesty, do point it out, but I believe I have done nothing other than observe that her analysis matches a definition taken from the Oxford English Dictionary.
I agree that she lacks examples. I believe I specified in earlier posts that I acknowledge that she has nothing concrete, and I’d like to say at this juncture that I find that rather problematic. However, I was simply suggesting that perhaps, since this is a specialist work, she has some sort of intuitive basis for this assertion. I am by no means giving her any more credit than that. For that matter, I’m currently looking for more detailed discussions of possible pronunciation differences. I’ve found one that’s purportedly by a linguist specialising in Japanese, but I am refusing to cite it here because I am unable to verify his credentials and he is also not citing any sources even though he is giving specific examples. Like I said, I feel the need to be accurate and fair when presenting my points. However, in many cases, I am simply sharing serendipitous discoveries or ideas for the benefit and reading pleasure of the wider community, in which case I will often cite sources and use such words as ‘I think’, ‘I believe’, ‘I guess’ and ‘I suppose’ in order to specify to all readers that I am only surmising certain things and am by no means presenting them as objective fact. For that matter, many of the things I share are meant to help everyone else draw their own conclusions. If you would much rather that I not attempt to summarise anything or link it to the discussion at hand by drawing on happy equivalences provided by definitions and by attempting to make inferences, then I will do my best to simply paste links and liberally quote from sources, parroting the thoughts of others while providing none of my own.
EDIT: if you’d rather I stop sounding passive-aggressive and performing pirouettes on the line that separates politeness from everything else, then I’ll get to the point: I’d like to be told how I’m reading too much into what she said, even if it’s only ‘a bit’, rather than simply be told that I am doing so, when I, as you can clearly see, do not think I did. I tend to feel as though I need to tell myself that I am disqualified by default from these discussions because everyone who participates actively seems to have a linguistics degree or background, so it seems that any attempt to contribute requires me to arrive with a thesis on the topic, because I’m nothing but someone who enjoys learning many languages.
@alo @ekg My final contributions to this discussion (at least for now). I need to sleep, and I’ve been searching for at least two hours now.
First of all (taken from Weblio’s section on the Osaka dialect), it seems that in some cases, there is a preference to split the sounds in おう for a particular purpose or meaning, even if there is strictly speaking only one word, as in the case of the affirmative おう below (equivalent to うん in Tokyo Japanese), which is pronounced O-U:
おう
| 大阪弁 | 訳語 | 解説 |
|---|---|---|
| おう | うん、え | 了解の返事や、相手に軽く圧力をかける気持ちが込められている。くだけた言い方で、主に男性が使用する。大阪では「おー」ではなく「おう」に近い発音をする。もしもし、おう、わしや。おう？誰が面倒見たっとる思うとんのや。おう、わーれー。 |
In addition, while this may not be from a native Japanese teacher, here’s a suggestion made in response to beginners trying to figure out ‘double vowels’:
http://www.yesjapan.com/YJ6/question/377/how-do-the-double-vowels-really-work
I quote: ‘Double vowels are actually just the Hiragana あいうえお following other Hiragana with the same sound. For example in Roman Letters the Japanese word for Mother is OKAASAN but in Hiragana it is おかあさん. I hope you can read that if not then come back to this question after Course 1 Lesson 9. If I had to sum up double vowels in one phrase it would be to just double the sound. Of course double vowels really lose their value and meaning once you are using Hiragana.’ (emphasis mine) It seems that simply following the kana is not an entirely incorrect approach.
Finally, here are some ideas on pronunciation from a book published by Tuttle (a publisher which often tackles Asian culture, in my experience) entitled ‘An Introduction to Japanese Kanji Calligraphy’, written as a collaboration between (from the authors’ names) a Japanese national and a foreign national:
I quote: ‘For example, the short “o” sound in the word “okami” is very similar to the “o” sound in the word “over”. In comparison, the long vowel “oo” in the word “ookii” is closer to the “-o o-” in the phrase “no over night parking”, which is different than “nover night parking”.’
Here is a screenshot of the pronunciation guide in the book (why exactly one would cover pronunciation in a calligraphy book, I do not know, but it’s best to know how to say what one is writing, no?):
In essence, it seems likely that some natives, at the very least, make a slight distinction, even if officially and in most cases, there is no difference, or only a very slight one.
@Cans101 As the OP on this thread, I have a feeling you might one day ask a different question, after overcoming the challenge of remembering which words come with a short O and a long O: how do I know if it’s OO or OU if they sound the same? A suggestion I found on some Japanese Q&A site while searching for the information above is this: if the reading involved is an on’yomi, it’s probably おう. If it’s a kun’yomi, it’s probably おお. All that there will be left to learn is the exceptions, like おうぎ (扇), which is a kun’yomi. Once again, all the best.
The resources look good and I don’t doubt their veracity. I think this is just an instance where the spoken form sounds different.
(I think I’ve come across one actual linguist so far…hello 
