>> It leaves um, uh, er and elongated versions (ummmm, uhhhhh) alone.
Something's already gone wrong here. Uh and er refer to the same sound. Uh is the American spelling. Er is British; to them a following "r" like that is just a kind of vowel.
Something's already gone wrong here. Uh and er refer to the same sound. Uh is the American spelling. Er is British; to them a following "r" like that is just a kind of vowel.
> it's usually used instead of "um" to indicate a correction and does sound different
Obviously people can hear the difference between vocalizing with your mouth open and vocalizing with your mouth closed. But there is no systematic difference in use, similarly to how there is no systematic difference in use between "uh-huh" and "mhm".
Neither. In Amrican English we're fully pronouncing the "r" when we say "er" instead of "um".
> Obviously people can hear the difference between vocalizing with your mouth open and vocalizing with your mouth closed.
That would be "uh" vs "um", not "er".
(Also, in case it wasn’t clear: I was quoting from the start of the article in that sentence.)
But not in any other sense.
> in case it wasn’t clear: I was quoting from the start of the article in that sentence.
You don't seem to be quoting from the article at all, actually. You've combined two different sentences in a way that grossly misrepresents what the article says. But that's not really relevant to the point here.