You mean “floor” and “door” are supposed to be one-syllable words?
Do tell.
I would say they’re one-syllable words. But, as per my previous post, the ‘R’ sound forces a different mouth shape, so one does kind of say ‘flow-er’ (pronounced like ‘flow’ and ‘er’, of course, not like ‘flower’) and doh-er. But at most I’d say 1 1/2 syllables. I don’t hear a hard, definitive 2-syllable vowel break, at least the way I say those words.
Not in much of the South.
Southern accents are funny that way-- sometimes typically one-syllable words are converted to two:
While other times, two-syllables words become one:
Syllables in many languages can be malleable, and it’s doubly true of short English words containing “r” and “l” – the English language’s approximants. Approximants can either bound a syllable (bar /baɹ/, ball /bal/) or serve as (part of) the nucleus of a syllable (bird /bɹd/ or /bɚd/, bottled /'bat.ld/).
When these approximants terminate an unstressed syllable (commonly preceded by a short schwa when spoken in isolation), such syllables can virtually disappear in conversational-speed speech:
“Please say this word” (holds up flash card)
“Dual” (pronounces /du: əl/)
“Very good. Now please read this paragraph.”
“[ … ] therefore these engines are merely dual overhead camshaft engines […]” (now pronouncing “dual” as /du:l/)
Thank you so much for this link! I learned some terms and formal recognition of trends I had independently observed.
Approximates, semivowels, glides, sonorants, consonant clusters, and in particular the processes of assimilation, dissimilation, and metathesis.
All of these technical names describe common effects across languages. The trends could all be loosely and not entirely inaccurately as the “lazy speech” I mentioned earlier, i.e. vocal efficiencies. I now have someplace to start my reading.
In my strongly British/Zimbabwean accent (via my Mother, British born English teacher) these two words are both single syllable and only slightly different in pronunciation.
ETA, her accent is the BBC style “Received Pronunciation” whereas mine has some regional differences.
Same with me (from Philly, so not just midwest). Duality, on the other hand, has four full syllables: doo-al-i-ty.
In my (Cleveland, Appalachia-influenced) accent, “duel” and “dual” are both definitely two syllables (and very close to or completely identical), but “fuel” is closer to one syllable (but a stretched syllable).
It’s doo-ul but fyoo-ul.
So my pronunciation of “dual” may be an idiosyncrasy - I think I may have started pronouncing it “du-al” on my own, to differential it from “duel”. It’s one of those cases where you encounter a word in writing first and have to decide how to pronounce it. Also, as a Hebrew speaker, pronouncing the two vowels separately is much easier for me than it is for most of you.
It’s very characteristic of working-class Dublin accents. Think “The Commitments” for example. The vowels in “town” “main” “moan” “mine” “moon” get broken into two very distinct syllables if (and only if) the syllable ends in a consonant. “teh-win”, “meh-yin”, “mo-wun”, “moi-yun”, “me-win”. It’s both a geographical and a class signifier.
In my accent, “duel” “dual” and “jewel” are all homophones, but “fool” and “fuel” are not.
Another thing about these differences in pronunciation is that even though the methods are consistent across dialects and languages, the specific changes in any dialect differ from other dialects. But just like all these pronunciations, what we grow up with is normal to us, but different pronunciation changes in other dialects sound strange, even stupid.
For example, “sammitch” for sandwich is bizarre to my ear. My dialect says “sanwich”. I’m sure there are words that I say that others think are equally bizarre.
Interesting! Does the d or j change pronunciation?
I suspect the d changes pronunciation, like how many accents pronounce “drum” as “jrum”.
Not the same phenomenon, but similar.
There are two things at play here, yod-dropping and yod-coalescence.
Yod-dropping is where American speakers pronounce “news” as “nooz” /nu:z/ rather than “nyooz” /nju:z/. For American speakers, “due” and “dew” sound like “do” /du:/.
Yod-coalescence is where a d-y cluster (even across syllable boundaries) turns into an affricate (in this case a j sound /dʒ/). For example “did you” is pronounced as “diju” /dɪdʒu/, “educate” is pronounced “ejicate” /ɛdʒʊkeɪt/. We even see this in written English in the word “gotcha”.
So in a variety that doesn’t have yod dropping, “due” is pronounced /dju:/ which coalesces to /dʒu:/
Due = dew = Jew
Duel = dual = jewel
Canadians too. Why are we always forgotten?
Oh wait. We’re the home of “aboot.” Except we are not. 
Find me a Canadian who says “aboot,” and I’ll show you a Newfoundlander. But not a Haligonian or anybody west of there.
Seriously, when I think of “two syllables for a one syllable word,” I think of American TV evangelists: “Fre-ynds, and I know you are my fre-ynds, I-uh ha-yev a wonderful-eh pi-yes of new-wes for you …”
Just sayin’, is all.
I can spot Canadian accents a mile away, but it’s not “aboot” and it only occurs when certain linguistic conditions are met. It’s closer to “aboat.” The word remains a diphthong, but the vowel on the first half of the diphthong is closer to an “uh” than an “ah.”I was just watching a cooking show on YouTube and wondered if the guy hosting it was Canadian, even though he lived in NYC and, sure enough, I found an article he was from Toronto.
I’m not sure why the stereotype became “aboot” as I’ve never heard an /u:/ there.
Living in Ontario, I regularly hear a vowel sound in “about” that is not the same vowel sound in “loud”. Whether you call that “aboot” or “aboat” or something else is in the ear of the listener.
I’ve heard it more “abow-ooht”, i.e. the abo starts like about, but the ut shifts to uht or soft oot, like put, not hoot.
To some ears, the second half being different registers more. Ergo, a-boot.
Also, that’s less Canada and more Minnesota and North Dakota.