 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009Is it too late for my American-sounding toddler?
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in school for the way he talks. Can we retrain him not to sound American? How? Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? Thanks for any advice. > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? 1. We're concerned that our 3-year-old sounds _too much_ like the local people! I think you should be happy that yours sounds more like you. 2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk? By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels uncomfortably different, you'll discover that at his age he'll learn to conform in no time. Whatever transpires, there's no need for any "retraining". Adrian > 2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk? > By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels > uncomfortably different, you'll discover that at his age he'll learn to > conform in no time. Whatever transpires, there's no need for any > "retraining". At age 5+ I wasn't exactly 'picked on' but I did have to answer an inordinate number of inquiries along the lines of 'Speak (or 'talk') some English!' This from native speakers of the language in Massachusetts, when we emigrated there from Lancashire. Of course, the same Bay Staters also badgered us with 'Do you know the Queen?', 'Have you met the Beatles?', and 'I love your accent, are you from Australia?' They also frequently offered us English muffins under the impression that so doing would make us feel 'at home'. I didn't lose my accent until I was about 14. By the time I was about 17 I had decided that the local accents of the places where I'd been living (the aforesaid Bay State and upstate New York) were a bit too extreme for future use, so chose myself a different accent when I went to university. I am no longer asked any of the above questions, but I doubt the accent change is the reason. cheers, Stephanie in Brussels >>2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk? >>By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I am no longer asked any of the above questions, but I doubt the > accent change is the reason. You may not have changed your accent for a long time, but I'd be willing to bet you quickly learned to avoid some of your native vocabulary and replace it with the local variants just so you would be understood.  SignatureRob Bannister > You may not have changed your accent for a long time, but I'd be willing > to bet you quickly learned to avoid some of your native vocabulary and > replace it with the local variants just so you would be understood. Indeed. Very soon after arriving in the US I turned down the offer of 'candy' because I didn't know what it was, and then saw the other children ('kids' in local parlance, which only meant 'young goats' to my mother, or so she then claimed) receive chocolates. I twigged to that one reet quick, I did. cheers, Stephanie learning a few local variants here too in Brussels > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? I'm sure he will pick up the local pronunciation at school. I'd be more worried about what the local accent is. I mean, he might end up sounding like a Brummie (we don't usually do smilies here in AUE but I see you're not from around these parts, so :-)) SignatureDavid Martha N wrote > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? Don't worry about it. In 1972, I came from the Midlands (of England) to live in Yorkshire. I have absolutely nothing against the Leeds accent, it's lovely, but as things turned out I have picked up very little of it -- except that I now say "ont' table", or even "ont'able", etc, instead of "on the table" etc . My wife, who I married a couple of years after I came here, has even less of a Leeds accent than I have -- she does not even stoop to "ont' table". Our two children, before school age, spoke with the same accent as we have. Within a year of starting school, they were talking with a slight Leeds accent. That was enough for them to be able to bluff their way through the Leeds schooling system without being picked on. The true Leeds accent, like cockney, is an endangered species. Labour is so mobile nowadays that people like me move into Leeds and inadvertently dilute the local accent, while other people born and bred in Leeds move to different parts of the country, again diluting the local accent. A city like Leeds therefore has a complete mixture of accent, from Caribbean [Spelling? - it's a miracle if I got that one correct] to Indian sub-continent, to Polish, to Midlands, London and Eastbourne. We normally aim to understand all these accents, and have plenty of practice doing it. Another point to mention is that (because of television) the American accent[1] is so well known in Britain that we hardly notice anybody who happens to speak with that accent. [1] or accents. Richard Chambers Leeds UK. On 10 Apr, 21:25, "Richard Chambers" <richard.chambers7_NoSp...@ntlworld.net> wrote: > In 1972, I came from the Midlands (of England) to live in Yorkshire. I have > absolutely nothing against the Leeds accent, it's lovely, but as things [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > was enough for them to be able to bluff their way through the Leeds > schooling system without being picked on. Every single word of the above paragraph applies to me (and my wife and children), even down to the date! In my experience, children *always* pick up their accents from their peers, not their parents (otherwise my Brummie schoolfriend with an Irish mother and Polish father would have sounded very odd). Anyway, I think foreign accents usually have a positive, rather than negative effect - they give the speaker a slightly exotic allure (especially with the opposite sex, which I suppose might cause a little jealousy). Mike M > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. As the others have said, don't worry about it: he'll fit in naturally. You may find your own accent a greater concern as it changes gradually to Mid-Atlantic. -- Mike. > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. People tend to settle (unconsciously) on the regional and social dialect they'll have for the rest of their life (see other responses in this thread) during their middle teens, when they first become acutely aware of social pressure and peer groups. So you have about a decade not to worry about your son's accent, and by the time he's 13 or 14, his accent will be the least of his traits that will be bothering you. Peter wrote on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:10:30 -0700 (PDT): PTD> On Apr 10, 2:38 pm, "Martha N." <mar...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote: ??>> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. ??>> Our three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, ??>> because he pronounces some things the American way, ??>> especially the d for t in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" ??>> (water and naughty). ??>> ??>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on ??>> in school for the way he talks. ??>> ??>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How? ??>> ??>> Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local ??>> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? ??>> ??>> Thanks for any advice. It's surprising how adaptable are kids. I started out Geordie, switched to West Highland Scottish, went back to Geordie, then West Yorkshire, back to the Highlands, college in Glasgow then to the US. I think my accent stopped changing much at that point, tho' when I bought a jacket in Oxford, the salesman said "Shall I send it to your college?" James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not [a.u.e. only] On Apr 10, 4:29 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote: > Peter wrote on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:10:30 -0700 (PDT): > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > point, tho' when I bought a jacket in Oxford, the salesman said > "Shall I send it to your college?" Can tha still do a' them accents, hinny? -- Jerry Friedman > > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > in this thread) during their middle teens, when they first become > acutely aware of social pressure and peer groups. This is as may be, but the accent people have is very much about who they identify with. I was bullied from my first schoolday, and although I had spoken the local dialect of Finnish with my friends until I started at school, I soon lost it entirely, because I didnt identify with them bastards I was going to school with. Instead, I spoke to everybody in my grandparents' literary Finnish - they were primary school teachers whose job it was to inculcate standard language. Now that I have been living in Southwestern Finland for half my lifetime, I have adopted both the local accent and many local dialectal traits. Few people believe I am from Eastern Finland at all when they hear me speaking. The fact is that I rather like it here and identify with the place, and have even started taking an interest in local history. The industrial casualty where I grew up I never liked, or identified with. It always was a place to get away from. Craoibhin66@gmail.com skreiv: >> People tend to settle (unconsciously) on the regional and social >> dialect they'll have for the rest of their life (see other responses [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > grew up I never liked, or identified with. It always was a place to > get away from. I moved twice during childhood, at nine and thirteen. Both times I remember adjusting my speech. First I moved within eastern Norway (the region around Oslo) to place with a more "rustic" version of the dialect, then across the country to a place with a dialect diverging from my own in almost every possible way. The first time I remember adjusting for sympathy and interest, the second time I didn't adjust much to the local way but switched to a bookish (or socially ambitious) Oslo sociolect to avoid being branded as a backward peasant. Elements of local vocabulary came later as I accepted my destiny and started liking the place. After moving as a young adult, first to a university with students from all over the country and then to where the job market took me -- which happened to be back in eastern Norway -- the bookish gradually was replaced by a more colloquial pattern. Now, 12 years after my last move, my speech is somewhere between my two first dialects, and I notice that it's still changing. But not so much in direction of the local dialect, I think, as by including more features from my childhood speech. SignatureTrond Engen - rootless > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Is it too late? Uh huh. But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian. Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up. But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford John Dean filted: >> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Uh huh. >But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian. Or that he's a great admirer of Alistair Cooke....r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? > > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian. > Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up. Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more than 16 years old or so. At best she's picked up some local traits so when she comes home to the US, folks notice that she has a "British accent." > But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it > is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you. >>> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >>> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more than 16 years > old or so. If Nigel Kennedy and Jamie Oliver can become cockneys late in life, anyone can be anything they want. Think of Eliza Doolittle. Think of Harold Wilson having elocution lessons to recapture his Yorkshire accent. Remember the Alamo. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford John wrote on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:00:47 +0100: JD> Peter T. Daniels wrote: ??>> On Apr 10, 6:51 pm, "John Dean" ??>> <john-d...@fraglineone.net> wrote: ??>>> Martha N. wrote: ??>>>> I'm American but live in England with my English ??>>>> husband. Our three-year-old must've picked up his speech ??>>>> from me, because he pronounces some things the American ??>>>> way, especially the d for t in words like "wadder" and ??>>>> "nawdy" (water and naughty). ??>>> ??>>>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked ??>>>> on in school for the way he talks. ??>>> ??>>>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How? ??>>> ??>>>> Is it too late? ??>>> ??>>> Uh huh. ??>>> But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's ??>>> Canadian. Or you could change the way *you* speak and let ??>>> him pick *that* up. ??>> ??>> Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more ??>> than 16 years old or so. ??>> JD> If Nigel Kennedy and Jamie Oliver can become cockneys late JD> in life, anyone can be anything they want. Think of Eliza JD> Doolittle. Think of Harold Wilson having elocution lessons JD> to recapture his Yorkshire accent. Remember the Alamo. To add another politician of the last century, Pandit Nehru took lessons to attempt to gain an Indian accent that he had not had previously (Harrow did not teach that!) James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian. > Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up. As I said in my other post, I have trouble (or at least I think I have trouble) pronouncing those "t"s the English way. > But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it > is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you. ISTR Bill Bryson described his kids going to school in New Hampshire as having British accents (and incidentally complaining about having to walk to school), but I can't remember what their ages were when they moved there (having lived in England since birth). SignatureThis sig no verb. > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not. SignatureRob Bannister > > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He > will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not. This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite my being a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman. That's from nursery. Once he starts school in September his accent will change to Wet Yorks. Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom, bahthroom, bathroom". At home he is more likely to talk about the bahthroom but at nursery about the bathroom. No teasing or bullying goes on. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary On 11 Apr 2008, Amethyst Deceiver wrote >>> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >>> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things > differently. I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son named "Martha". (I bet *that* would get him teased.) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 11 Apr 2008, Amethyst Deceiver wrote > > Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things > > differently. > > I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son named > "Martha". (I bet *that* would get him teased.) I'm not that cruel a mother. We did tell people before he was born that a girl would be called Clytemnestra. Someone told us in all seriousness that she'd have a dreadful nickname. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary > > > I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son named [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that a girl would be called Clytemnestra. Someone told us in all > seriousness that she'd have a dreadful nickname. True. I recently had an awkward student at S****** with the name of Orestes and an overbearing mother. I never did find out her name, however. DC -- > > > > > I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son named [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Orestes and an overbearing mother. I never did find out her name, > however. Orestes was our other chosen name. I was amazed at how many people a) thought we serious about these choices and b) thought that they had some right to choose our baby's name. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary On 14 Apr 2008, Amethyst Deceiver wrote >>>> I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son >>>> named "Martha". (I bet that would get him teased.) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > people a) thought we serious about these choices and b) thought > that they had some right to choose our baby's name. "Chlamydia" is such a pretty name... SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 14 Apr 2008, Amethyst Deceiver wrote >>>>> I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son >>>>> named "Martha". (I bet that would get him teased.) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> people a) thought we serious about these choices and b) thought >> that they had some right to choose our baby's name. > "Chlamydia" is such a pretty name... Nothing compared to Diarrhea though. Signature"I used to hate the sun, because it'd shone on everything I'd done. Made me feel that all that I had done was overfill the ashtray of m life." :> On 14 Apr 2008, Amethyst Deceiver wrote : [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] : : Nothing compared to Diarrhea though. "It's pronounced shie-THEED!" -- Joshua Holmes - jdholmes@stwing.org Per aspera, luctor et emergo. > > True. I recently had an awkward student at S****** with the name of > > Orestes and an overbearing mother. I never did find out her name, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > thought we serious about these choices and b) thought that they had > some right to choose our baby's name. You'd have wanted to keep him out of the bathroom, then. DC -- >> Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He >> will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not. > >This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite my being >a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman. That's from nursery. >Once he starts school in September his accent will change to Wet Yorks. Raining again is it? How does he say bus? >Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He >spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom, >bahthroom, bathroom". At home he is more likely to talk about the >bahthroom but at nursery about the bathroom. No teasing or bullying goes >on. Adults can have problems if they have a non-local accent. You get that "You're not from around here" business followed by "I've lived here for 500 years". With yorkshire people though they tell you where they're from within minutes of meeting you, despite their accent giving the location away. I don't think my son has got a mancy accent - well not a great deal of one. I speak very differently from my sisters - they sound very yocal indeed. Signaturehttp://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk http://www.holidayunder100.co.uk > >> Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He > >> will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Raining again is it? As ever. > How does he say bus? With the u sound in "put". All his u sounds are that one. His "cup" and "mummy" sound very different from mine. I'm a southerner. > >Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He > >spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > one. I speak very differently from my sisters - they sound very yocal > indeed. In my neck of the woods it's not uncommon for people to say "oh, no, I'm not local, I'm from [3 miles away] and I only moved here 30 years ago". SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary On Apr 15, 12:21 pm, Amethyst Deceiver <s...@lindsayendell.co.uk> wrote: > In my neck of the woods it's not uncommon for people to say "oh, no, I'm > not local, I'm from [3 miles away] and I only moved here 30 years ago". After all the adaptation to local vocabulary I made as a child, having moved from Lancashire to Massachusetts, I was quite disappointed at a slightly later age when I realised I'd never be local there: to do that it turned out you had to have had ancestors buried in the 'old cemetery' -- which had closed (as 'full') about 1800. Actually, I think it was 1799 or so. cheers, Stephanie in Brussels, where I'm definitely not local >On Apr 15, 12:21 pm, Amethyst Deceiver <s...@lindsayendell.co.uk> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Stephanie >in Brussels, where I'm definitely not local Did you think about joining the Daughters of the British Empire? > > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He > will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not. Not always. My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his life (early teens at the time) in Illinois. -- Jerry Friedman (Snip) > My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent > much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his > life (early teens at the time) in Illinois Pat: Have you lived all your life in New York City? Mike: Not yet. >>>I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >>>three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his > life (early teens at the time) in Illinois. How different and how strong are they? And how desirable are the two accents? And which accent is more likely to heard on TV? Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something I did notice in the classroom was an initial inclination to change to the local accent, followed later, as the child grew in confidence and had been accepted by his/her peers, to a change back to the original accent, but with local vocabulary items and some accent modification. SignatureRob Bannister > jerry_fried...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > How different and how strong are they? Quite noticeably different, to an American. I'm not sure how to measure strength of accents (especially in sci.lang). The accent of the lad in question was maybe halfway between the most and least prestigious versions of a New York accent. > And how desirable are the two accents? The "lowest" New York accent, what Labov calls Brooklynese (I think), probably the most undesirable accent in North America, though that may have changed since September, 2001, when firefighters and others with that accent were being lionized (not unreasonably). But I'm talking about the late '80s. The accents of east-central Illinois are not considered especially desirable, I think. But this kid would have heard a variety of accents in that college town (Urbana, Illinois). > And which accent is more likely to heard on TV? On national TV, a "lower" version of the New York one, but generally for comic or criminal characters. On local TV he would have heard versions of the local accent fairly often, I think (but I didn't watch much TV, so I don't know). > Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely > some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something > I did notice in the classroom was an initial inclination to change to > the local accent, followed later, as the child grew in confidence and > had been accepted by his/her peers, to a change back to the original > accent, but with local vocabulary items and some accent modification. A good trick. I can't imagine doing it, but I've never been in that situation. -- Jerry Friedman On Apr 13, 11:16 am, jerry_fried...@yahoo.com wrote: > > jerry_fried...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > The "lowest" New York accent, what Labov calls Brooklynese (I think), Labov denies there is any geographic accent variation within New York City; he says the social stratification is uniform citywide. > probably the most undesirable accent in North America, though that may > have changed since September, 2001, when firefighters and others with [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > versions of the local accent fairly often, I think (but I didn't watch > much TV, so I don't know). Few or no local NY TV anchors have a local accent, even the oldest, such as Gabe Pressman. Radio announcers very often do. Network TV personnel, curiously, often do have local accents -- such as Dan Rather and, noteworthily, the instantly identifiable New Yorker Daniel Schorr (now on NPR). > > Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely > > some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > A good trick. I can't imagine doing it, but I've never been in that > situation. You probably wouldn't realize you were doing it. >> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local >> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? Individual children vary enormously in this. 35 years ago my (then) wife was in exactly the position you describe: she was an American woman living in England with her English husband. We had two daughters, one born in 1969, the other in 1971. The older picked the accent of whatever children she interacted with within a day of changing her environment, the younger spoke in her own way completely unaffected by how the children around her spoke. Around 1978 they went for about two months to the US, while I stayed in England. The older one sounded American the first time they telephoned me (i.e. within a day or so of arriving); the younger one sounded just as British as ever when they came back. Both of them now live in the US, and their accents have switched around: the older one still sounds British even to a British person (she doubtless sounds very British to Americans); the younger one sounds American (to me; her friends there may think otherwise). All this to say that almost nothing you can do will affect the way your child speaks. I certainly wouldn't try to stop him sounding American. If you want to stop him acquiring a strong local British accent you need to choose his school with care. Signatureathel > Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? You have nothing to worry about. I went to London at nine years old and went from an American accent to the local accent in about six months. I personally have no memory of this, but all my relatives tell me it's so, so it must be true. It took me about the same amount of time to regain my American accent at the age of eleven when I moved back to the States. (Again, no memory of ever being even aware of my accent.) Marc >> Or will he automatically pick up the local >> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Marc Our litttle French grandaughter, now in her third year at the Ecole Maternelle in Paris, is correcting her English speaking mother's French accent! >I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he >pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t >in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). My grandmother was born in America, but came to England at the age of around 7 and lived in Manchester until around her mid-teens. As an adult she spoke pure Mancunian English. From memory, there's a woman called Judith Rich Harris (no relation of mine) who studied the children of Hungarian immigrants into America, and particularly why they picked up American voices from their peers, and not Hungarian accents from their parents. I think she used this to make some controversial inferences about parental influence, but the fundamental point stands, that children acquire the accent of where they grow up. It's fairly certain that your son will start speaking British English once he's at school. I appreciate your anxiety that he might get picked on when he starts school, but probably better to deal with that if and when it happens (the school should be supportive if he is being bullied), than try to train him to speak differently now. Interestingly, my son was friendly with a little boy both of whose parents were American, but who lived and attended nursery/pre-school in England. At 3 years old this boy's accent was genuinely mid-Atlantic. Martin > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? No, it is not too late. At the age of three and for quite a few years later, kids tend naturally to pick up the accent around them. So the likelihood is that your child will pick up whatever is the predominant accent in his school. Dpending on where it is you plan to live, you may well find your school in England has children with a great variety of accents anyway. In London this seems to result with children emerging with a generic London mix, which is significantly different from the Estuary English formerly London associated, but now more the accent of the outer suburbs and surrounding counties. A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway, your child might be admired for it rather than bullied. But likelihood is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch it off when talking at school. Matthew Huntbach [ ... ] > A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway, > your child might be admired for it rather than bullied. That is certainly true. Most people in Europe (especially children) think that American television programmes present an accurate picture of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican very glamorous. > But likelihood > is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch > it off when talking at school. Signatureathel On 2008-04-11 16:05:17 +0200, I said: > [ ... ] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > think that American television programmes present an accurate picture > of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican Just a typo; not intentional. > very glamorous. > >> But likelihood >> is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch >> it off when talking at school. Signatureathel >[ ... ] > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican >very glamorous. Are most Europeans, even children, so gullible? I may not have been born one, but I've lived among two varieties of them enough years to think your generalization is somewhat cruel. With today's mass communications, couldn't today's young people, whether European, Asian or American, be characterized as more jaded than naive? >> But likelihood >> is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch >> it off when talking at school. SignatureChuck Riggs > A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway, > your child might be admired for it rather than bullied. But likelihood > is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch > it off when talking at school. That last bit makes a lot of sense. I suspect most children, like adults, have a variety of accents and grammar/vocabulary that they turn on and off for specific situations. SignatureRob Bannister > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. I've found the replies interesting. My parents were from the midlands and say things like "b-ar-th" and "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north where it's a short "a" rather than "ar". All three of us children grew up with the southern accent, and all got teased/bullied about it, from about age 7. It was said to be "posh". I kept this accent until I went to secondary school, when I deliberately changed my accent. I had a friend at primary who came (gradually north in stages) from London and she had had similar problems once she hit northern accented schools (so much that in one school she refused to speak at all) Of course when I came south to college, everyone said hown northern I sounded... To the OP. I don't think the American accent will be much of a problem. Just make sure you use "trousers" rather than "pants". That's probably the most likely thing that can get laughed at. I'd also give him something to say when someone says "why do you talk like that?" and they will, even at a young age. If he knows to say "mummy's from America" it gives him something to say when he's asked. Debbie > "Martha N." <martha@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message >> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he >> pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t >> in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). > I've found the replies interesting. > My parents were from the midlands and say things like "b-ar-th" and > "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north where it's a short "a" rather than > "ar". We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the difference between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc, (then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who pronounce their 'h's and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have in English). Matthew Huntbach > We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they > pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of > as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash (appropriately making Washington Warshington). Marc > > We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they > > pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of > > as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the > > And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash > (appropriately making Washington Warshington). Which, to the persons Matthew was instructing, will appear to make no sense at all! > And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash > (appropriately making Washington Warshington). That's the local Washingtonian way of saying it. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email. > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:07:26 -0400, Marc wrote > (in article [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That's the local Washingtonian way of saying it. Not Washington, DC, but St. Louis, MO, site of Washington University. >> And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash >> (appropriately making Washington Warshington). > > That's the local Washingtonian way of saying it. is he a new yawker, or supposed to be one? would make sense. I've lived on the East Coast my whole life, and no in DC. The only people I have ever heard say it that way were from Roanoke. mk5000 " Why the drinking laws are unfair I have a dream that my two children will not be judged by the date of their birth."--guardenmen > > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:07:26 -0400, Marc wrote > > (in article [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I've lived on the East Coast my whole life, and no in DC. The only people I > have ever heard say it that way were from Roanoke. Please see my response to the same message, posted more than 13 months ago. >> > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:07:26 -0400, Marc wrote >> > (in article [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Please see my response to the same message, posted more than 13 months >ago. How can we do that, Petey? I am one of the people who read alt.usage.english and see this message in this group. However, you never post in alt.usage.english. We're not even supposed to know you exist. This message - the one that I am responding to - is posted in sci.lang, uk.people.parents, alt.english.usage, and alt.usenet legends.lester-mosely. I'm pointing this out because you have persistently refused to attempt to grasp the concept of replying to cross-postings and that your messages go to places you insist that you have never been to. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > This message - the one that I am responding to - is posted in > sci.lang, uk.people.parents, alt.english.usage, and alt.usenet > legends.lester-mosely. I'm pointing this out because you have > persistently refused to attempt to grasp the concept of replying to > cross-postings and that your messages go to places you insist that you > have never been to. not sure what the fuss is, but it seems he was talking about this, not that hard to find http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/4657f881654a77e3?hl=en >>> And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash >>> (appropriately making Washington Warshington). [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I've lived on the East Coast my whole life, and no in DC. The only people I >have ever heard say it that way were from Roanoke. "Warsh", for "wash", is frequently heard in Indiana. One of my best friends, who grew up within a few miles of me, said "warsh" and "orl" (for "oil"). I don't. His father was a lawyer and judge, so it isn't a class thing. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida > > "Martha N." <martha@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > difference between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc, > (then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who pronounce their 'h's Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-) How do they write them down? :-) pjk > and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" where > "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have in English). > > Matthew Huntbach On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha <paul.nospam.kriha@paradise.net.nz> wrote in <news:4800329a$1@clear.net.nz> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: [...] >>> My parents were from the midlands and say things like >>> "b-ar-th" and "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north >>> where it's a short "a" rather than "ar". >> We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, >> that they pronounce their 'r's. A majority of Americans are rhotic, but by no means all. >> So what you write as "ar", they will think of as >> symbolising "arrr". Depends on where you're writing. I can think of a couple of newsgroups in which many of the Americans would understand. >> You could write it as "ah" to convey the difference >> between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc, This, however, is indeed safer. >> (then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who >> pronounce their 'h's > Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-) > How do they write them down? :-) They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while writing the fourth letter of the alphabet. >> and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" >> where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have >> in English). There are two common articulations of American /r/, and neither is guttural. Brian > On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha > <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > There are two common articulations of American /r/, and > neither is guttural. And that has something to do with the comment on the spelling <ah> for the vowel [a(:)]? > On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha > <paul.nospam.kriha@paradise.net.nz> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while > writing the fourth letter of the alphabet. Yes, but those would be Russians writing Ukrainian 'h's. :-) He said "Russians pronounce their 'h's". There are no such animals in that particular jungle. :-) Apart from there being no Russian 'h', many Russians can't pronounce anybody else's 'h'. You may notice that new Russian emigrees (as well as some Poles) often mispronounce 'h' as 'ch' (as in 'loch'). pjk > >> and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" > >> where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Brian On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:12:29 +1200, Paul J Kriha <paul.nospam.kriha@paradise.net.nz> wrote in <news:48017a18@clear.net.nz> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >> On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha >> <paul.nospam.kriha@paradise.net.nz> wrote in >> <news:4800329a$1@clear.net.nz> in >> sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: [...] >>>> (then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who >>>> pronounce their 'h's >>> Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-) >>> How do they write them down? :-) >> They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while >> writing the fourth letter of the alphabet. > Yes, but those would be Russians writing Ukrainian 'h's. :-) > He said "Russians pronounce their 'h's". Yes, but you asked how they wrote them down. Since they have none, they have to steal someone else's! > There are no such animals in that particular jungle. :-) > Apart from there being no Russian 'h', many Russians can't > pronounce anybody else's 'h'. You may notice that new Russian > emigrees (as well as some Poles) often mispronounce 'h' as > 'ch' (as in 'loch'). Which is why borrowings like <gospital'> always rather amused me. Brian [...] > Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-) > How do they write them down? :-) Very carefully, like the Ukrainians. ~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~ Hello, > We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in > school for the way he talks. > Can we retrain him not to sound American? How? I don't think you should. He should learn to appreciate why you have a different accent. > Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local > pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? > for any advice. I think you'll find that he'll speak differently depending on the environment he's in. I bet your husband can tell whether you are speaking to someone from England or someone from the US when you are talking on the phone or maybe when you've come back from a visit to the US your accent is stronger. We moved to Norfolk when I was 6. I think my siblings and I all had an ability to "speak Norfolk" when with our local friends, but spoke differently to our parents. Social creatures mostly subconsciously try and fit into the group they are in. Mary Ann Mary wrote on Sat, 12 Apr 2008 03:41:44 -0700 (PDT): ??>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on ??>> in school for the way he talks. ??>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How? MA> I don't think you should. He should learn to appreciate why MA> you have a different accent. ??>> ??>> Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local ??>> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people? ??>> for any advice. MA> I think you'll find that he'll speak differently depending MA> on the environment he's in. MA> I bet your husband can tell whether you are speaking to MA> someone from England or someone from the US when you are MA> talking on the phone or maybe when you've come back from a MA> visit to the US your accent is stronger. You know that's an interesting point! I suppose as a child whose parents moved around a lot, I shifted accents quickly to avoid standing out. In my opinion, a lot of kids are like that. I still remember being embarrassed at school in Leeds when my Geordie "o" pronunciation was commented on.. I also remember my wife pointing out, after an evening talking to friends from Georgia, that my accent had slipped in a southerly direction and I was in my 30s then! I can still sing "The Blaydon Races" with a fairly good Geordie pronunciation but it helps to have spent an hour or two talking to my relatives from that area first. The quality of my singing is another matter! MA> We moved to Norfolk when I was 6. I think my siblings and I MA> all had an ability to "speak Norfolk" when with our local MA> friends, but spoke differently to our parents. Social MA> creatures mostly subconsciously try and fit into the group MA> they are in. James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he > pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t > in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I aspirate them a bit much). On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I wouldn't worry yet. SignatureTwo of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't think that this is a coincidence. [anonymous] >> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he >> pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t >> in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). > Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the > English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I > aspirate them a bit much). Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop, Matthew Huntbach [...] >> Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the >> English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I >> aspirate them a bit much). > > Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British > casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop, Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t", or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right? SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** On Apr 18, 4:14 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote: > [...] > >> Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com** The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed /- @n/ (or syllabic /n/ if you will). In "Putin", as well as in "puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally released [t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a glottal stop. What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"? Ross Clark > On Apr 18, 4:14 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap >> "t", or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right? > The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed /- > @n/ (or syllabic /n/ if you will). In "Putin", as well as in > "puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally released > [t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a glottal stop. > > What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"? Right. Any association with US casual speech pronunciation and KissingerE is extremely far-fetched. > benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: > > On Apr 18, 4:14 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Right. Any association with US casual speech pronunciation and > KissingerE is extremely far-fetched. If this is a reference to the former Secretary of State, I wouldn't expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native speaker of AmEng say "feadure"? Ross Clark >> benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: >>> On Apr 18, 4:14 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native speaker of AmEng > say "feadure"? There may be a few who say "fee tyure", but I think most say "fee cher". With Kissinger's thick German accent, I would think he was saying "fee djer", but would need to hear a clip of him saying the word. Maybe he does say "fee der". Pat Durkin filted: >There may be a few who say "fee tyure", but I think most say "fee cher". >With Kissinger's thick German accent, I would think he was saying "fee >djer", but would need to hear a clip of him saying the word. Maybe he >does say "fee der". Remember what the Dormouse said?...r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? >> benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: >>> On Apr 18, 4:14 am, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native speaker of AmEng > say "feadure"? Oh God. I really must learn to check the newsgroups list before posting. But I'd have expected even sci.lang readers to realise that the term "KissingerE" was highly likely to carry the implication that the former Secretary of War Crimes is indeed /not/ typical of anything but himself. It wasn't very funny, though, so it's reasonable to excuse habitués of Perhaps the Most Humourless Group on Usenet from spotting the feeble jocularity. SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** On Apr 18, 12:10 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote: > benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: > >> benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Perhaps the Most Humourless Group on Usenet from spotting the feeble > jocularity. Or, you could attempt jocularity that rises above the level of feeble. > On Apr 18, 12:10 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Or, you could attempt jocularity that rises above the level of feeble. Indeed. But a trifling smirk is generally acceptable among friends. As I said, I hadn't made myself aware that I was also broadcasting to sci.lang, where it seems one generally has to fart while standing on one's head to cause merriment. SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** [...] > I hadn't made myself aware that I was also broadcasting to > sci.lang, where it seems one generally has to fart while standing on > one's head to cause merriment. Anyway, that did it. I actually laughed out loud. > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Anyway, that did it. I actually laughed out loud. Which, of course, speaks to the level of "humor" enjoyed at aue, not at sci.lang. >On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:08:34 +0100, "Mike Lyle" ><mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> said: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Anyway, that did it. I actually laughed out loud. It cheered me up too, after all that Dawkins fall-out, for which I blame another Lyle post. SignaturePaul > On Apr 18, 12:10 pm, "Mike Lyle" > <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote: [kissinger now] >>> If this is a reference to the former Secretary of State, I >>> wouldn't expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native >>> speaker of AmEng say "feadure"? >> Oh God. I really must learn to check the newsgroups list before >> posting. But I'd have expected even sci.lang readers to realise [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> though, so it's reasonable to excuse habitués of Perhaps the Most >> Humourless Group on Usenet from spotting the feeble jocularity. > Or, you could attempt jocularity that rises above the level of > feeble. Haha, that's very logical. On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:10:46 +0100, Mike Lyle <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in <news:b5faa$4808c78f$27712@news.teranews.com> in sci.lang,alt.usage.english: [...] > Oh God. I really must learn to check the newsgroups list > before posting. But I'd have expected even sci.lang > readers to realise that the term "KissingerE" was highly > likely to carry the implication that the former Secretary > of War Crimes is indeed /not/ typical of anything but > himself. It's completely opaque. What on earth is the <E> supposed to signify? [...] Brian > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:10:46 +0100, Mike Lyle > <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It's completely opaque. What on earth is the <E> supposed > to signify? We (in AUE) have used this to indicate various forms or styles of the English language. When someone's usage has a particular form, we add the individual's name to the E as a descriptive. AmE, BrE are American and British English, for example. TCE has been used to refer to Tony Cooper's style. I think Oleg Lego refers to WCanE (Western Canadian English). I don't know why we haven't used UKE, but both AmE and BrE are already too broad as classifiers. However, they do serve to designate styles of spelling and publishing, though not of pronunciation. On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:11:14 -0500, Pat Durkin <durk183@sbc.com> wrote in <news:uheOj.7377$GE1.4890@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com> in sci.lang,alt.usage.english: >> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:10:46 +0100, Mike Lyle >> <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in >> <news:b5faa$4808c78f$27712@news.teranews.com> in >> sci.lang,alt.usage.english: >> [...] >>> Oh God. I really must learn to check the newsgroups list >>> before posting. But I'd have expected even sci.lang >>> readers to realise that the term "KissingerE" was highly >>> likely to carry the implication that the former Secretary >>> of War Crimes is indeed /not/ typical of anything but >>> himself. >> It's completely opaque. What on earth is the <E> supposed >> to signify? > We (in AUE) have used this to indicate various forms or styles of the > English language. [...] Thanks. Brian >> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:10:46 +0100, Mike Lyle >> <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Cooper's style. I think Oleg Lego refers to WCanE (Western Canadian >English). I don't know why we haven't used UKE, We have. It has been used occasionally by David the Omrud, Bob Lieblich, Mark Barratt, myself, and possibly others. (Thank you Google Groups.) >but both AmE and BrE >are already too broad as classifiers. However, they do serve to >designate styles of spelling and publishing, though not of >pronunciation. Even broader classifiers are HibBrE (Hibernian and British English) and BrEtcE (British Etc. English: the English of E-speaking countries other than the USA). SignatureBob Lieblich -- Peter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> It's completely opaque. What on earth is the <E> supposed >>> to signify? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > -- > Bob Lieblich Hmm, I see Peter Duncanson answering, and his sig was present. Now I see Liebs' (in his inimitable LiebsE style) was above Peter's. So. . Are you leap-frogging in your piling on of my simple, if erroneous, statement, or is this a screwup of another sort? WTF? If you (or both of you) have so much time as to scan Google Groups just to prove me wrong, I must protest. You should have answered Brian Scott's post before I did. >>>> It's completely opaque. What on earth is the <E> supposed >>>> to signify? [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >just to prove me wrong, I must protest. You should have answered Brian >Scott's post before I did. There was no chance of my answering Brian Scott before you did. I was asleep. It was 5 in the morning here. It was another six hours before I started reading AUE. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > [...] > >> Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t", > or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right? It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t" in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite different sound altogether. :-) pjk On Apr 18, 5:35 pm, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > [...] > > >> Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > pjk Hey, this is George W Bush we're talkin' about here! Don't assume he can even pronounce "palatalized". Or "phonetics". I just took as my starting point that he has phonemicized it as /pu:tn/ (rhymes with / bu:t sku:tn/) and went from there. Ross Clark >>... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which >>I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite > different sound altogether. :-) So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) Bart Mathias >> It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t" >> in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's > own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) Yes, so you'd better be choosy about your foreign friends and colleagues or learn to pronounce a lot of different kinds of "r". SignatureDo you know what they do to book thieves up at Santa Rita? http://www.shigabooks.com/indeces/bookhunter.html Adam wrote on Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:38:33 +0100: ??>>> It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t" ??>>> in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all ??>>> equally wrong anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized ??>>> "t", which is a quite different sound altogether. :-) ??>> ??>> So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in ??>> the namee's own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) AF> Yes, so you'd better be choosy about your foreign friends AF> and colleagues or learn to pronounce a lot of different AF> kinds of "r". I've already said that the ultimate authority on the pronunciation of a personal name is the holder but no-one called Qwertyzip who wants to be called Bob should get too indignant immediately, IMHO. If the name uses sounds that are not usual in English, it may be a long time! As far as Mr. Putin is concerned, his name is a bit unfortunate and I have heard it pronounced just as in French Canadian heart attack food, "Poutine". James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >>> ... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which >>> I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's > own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) Isn't it a question of politeness? I don't believe for one moment that anyone would expect you or anyone else to produce the exact pronunciation of a difficult-to-pronounce foreign name, but a fair attempt would no doubt be appreciated. Don't we try to call people in our own countries by the name they wish to be called by? By "fair attempt", I suppose I mean getting as close as possible while using mainly the sounds in the speaker's own language, and that is where the problem lies. I imagine GWB's pronunciation of Putin is as close as he can get in his dialect, so perhaps this is one instance where we shouldn't put him down. When it comes to newsreaders, however, I do think they could do a better job. SignatureRob Bannister >> So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's >> own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > where we shouldn't put him down. When it comes to newsreaders, > however, I do think they could do a better job. An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can change considerably. Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me when Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative, when other cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is especially noticeable when someone is being addressed (vocative case being required). SignatureSkitt (AmE) Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:45:20 -0700: "Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net>: in sci.lang: >An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as in my >native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can change [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is especially noticeable >when someone is being addressed (vocative case being required). It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is, but I heard it.) SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com > "Skitt" in sci.lang: >> An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as >> in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is, > but I heard it.) I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton". It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it sounds strange. The same sort of ending change for the feminine gender exists also in Latvian. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/ > > "Skitt" in sci.lang: > >> An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton". Or could just as well be the genitive/accusative if they're talking about Bill. Ross Clark > It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it > sounds strange. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > -- > Skitt (in Hayward, California)http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/ > > > "Skitt" in sci.lang: > > >> An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Ross Clark The Hillary's surname name is much more likely to be "Clintonova" or "Klintonova", not "Clintona". > > It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it > > sounds strange. It's not only that it would sound strange when you speak Russian, it's decidedly ungrammatical if the name is not properly declined. Sometimes, without a correctly declined name the sentence may become ambiguous or loose correct meaning. > > The same sort of ending change for the feminine gender exists also in > > Latvian. > > -- > > Skitt (in Hayward, California)http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/ pjk >>>> "Skitt" in sci.lang: >>>>> An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such >>>>> as in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > The Hillary's surname name is much more likely to be "Clintonova" > or "Klintonova", not "Clintona". That's only if her husband were Klintonov. Look at Yuri Sharapov and his daughter Masha Sharapova. (Yeah, just look at her!) SignatureSkitt (AmE) has lived under both, Stalin and Hitler regimes Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:50:08 -0700: "Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net>: in sci.lang: >I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton". Could be, although I heard it many years ago, when Bill was president and Hillary wans't in the picture very much. Perhaps it was actually Klintono with an unstressed o that I (mis)heard as a? >It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it >sounds strange. Of course. Could my "Klintona" have been a genitive? In http://www.alphadictionary.com/rusgrammar/case.html I see a Borisa in the sentence meaning: 'Ivan wrote a letter to a friend of Boris with a pen.' Also stola 'of the table' in Declension one, masculin. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com > "Skitt in sci.lang: >> I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of >> "Clinton". [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Also stola 'of the table' in Declension one, masculin. Even though I lived under Stalin's rule, I was too young to learn Russian grammar. In other words, I don't know. (It could be the genitive in Latvian.) For the Latvian singular: Masc Fem Nom Klintons Klintona Gen Klintona Klintonas Dat Klintonam Klintonai Acc Klintonu Klintonu Inst ar Klintonu ar Klintonu Loc Klintonâ Klintonâ Voc Klinton! Klintona! Then there's the plurals, but I won't bother. SignatureSkitt (AmE) it's been a long, long time ... Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:23:56 -0700: S> Ruud Harmsen wrote: ??>> "Skitt in sci.lang: ??>>> I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine ??>>> version of "Clinton". ??>> ??>> Could be, although I heard it many years ago, when Bill ??>> was president and Hillary wans't in the picture very much. ??>> Perhaps it was actually Klintono with an unstressed o that ??>> I (mis)heard as a? ??>> ??>>> It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you ??>>> don't, all of it sounds strange. ??>> ??>> Of course. ??>> ??>> Could my "Klintona" have been a genitive? In ??>> http://www.alphadictionary.com/rusgrammar/case.html I see a Borisa in ??>> the sentence meaning: ??>> 'Ivan wrote a letter to a friend of Boris with a pen.' ??>> ??>> Also stola 'of the table' in Declension one, masculin. S> Even though I lived under Stalin's rule, I was too young to S> learn Russian grammar. In other words, I don't know. (It S> could be the genitive in Latvian.) S> For the Latvian singular: S> Masc Fem S> Nom Klintons Klintona S> Gen Klintona Klintonas S> Dat Klintonam Klintonai S> Acc Klintonu Klintonu S> Inst ar Klintonu ar Klintonu S> Loc Klintonâ Klintonâ S> Voc Klinton! Klintona! S> Then there's the plurals, but I won't bother. Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record for number of cases or are there languages with more? James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >>> "Skitt in sci.lang: >>>> I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine >>>> version of "Clinton". [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record for > number of cases or are there languages with more? I don't know. Isn't it the same as Latin? I took Latin for almost three years, but it was long ago and far away. SignatureSkitt (AmE) Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:51:25 -0700: S> James Silverton wrote: ??>> ??>>> Then there's the plurals, but I won't bother. ??>> ??>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record ??>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? S> I don't know. Isn't it the same as Latin? I took Latin for S> almost three years, but it was long ago and far away. I've happily forgotten most of the details of Latin but the number of cases seems one greater. AFAIK, there is no "inst" or "loc" case in Latin but there is one called the ablative. James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not On Apr 21, 1:58 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote: > Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:51:25 -0700: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > number of cases seems one greater. AFAIK, there is no "inst" or > "loc" case in Latin but there is one called the ablative. No Indo-European language can hold a candle in number of cases to many familiar Uralic languages, such as Finnish and Hungarian -- but you can't pin them down to exact numbers, because some of the cases can be analyzed into combinations of others. >>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record >>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > number of cases seems one greater. AFAIK, there is no "inst" or > "loc" case in Latin but there is one called the ablative. No locative? I think you are wrong on that one. It's just not very common. As for the ablative, it includes the instrumental, I believe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin SignatureSkitt (AmE) Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:29:46 -0700: S> James Silverton wrote: ??>>> James Silverton wrote: ??>>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record ??>>>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? ??>> ??>>> I don't know. Isn't it the same as Latin? I took Latin ??>>> for almost three years, but it was long ago and far away. ??>> ??>> I've happily forgotten most of the details of Latin but ??>> the number of cases seems one greater. AFAIK, there is no ??>> "inst" or "loc" case in Latin but there is one called the ??>> ablative. S> No locative? I think you are wrong on that one. It's just S> not very common. S> As for the ablative, it includes the instrumental, I S> believe. S> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin Without looking at the Wiki article, to the best of my knowledge, I'd never heard of the locative in Latin. James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >>>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record >>>>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Without looking at the Wiki article, to the best of my > knowledge, I'd never heard of the locative in Latin. I believe that you have never heard of it, but it is there, barely. Here's more about it: http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/ln.html It has a table, showing all seven cases with the following note: The listed sources are inconsistent on how the locative is formed, so the above table might not agree with your textbook. There is agreement among my textbooks that in the first and second declension, the locative singular is identical with the genitive form, and that in plurals it is always the same as the dative-ablative form. Where they differ is in the locative forms for the singulars of the third, fourth and fifth declension. (It probably never occurs in the fifth declension!) For third declension singular, some say that it may take either the dative or the ablative form, while others say it takes the dative form. (Most of the examples they give seem to be the same as the dative in form.) For fourth declension singular, one says the dative forms are used, but the only actual example seems to be the fourth declension word domus whose locative is domi. But domus affords other problems since it was moving from fourth to second declension in classical times, and this form is consistent with its second declension paradigm. SignatureSkitt (AmE) Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:59:30 -0700: S> James Silverton wrote: ??>>> James Silverton wrote: ??>>>>> James Silverton wrote: ??>>>>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the ??>>>>>> record for number of cases or are there languages with ??>>>>>> more? ??>>>> ??>>>>> I don't know. Isn't it the same as Latin? I took ??>>>>> Latin for almost three years, but it was long ago and ??>>>>> far away. ??>>>> ??>>>> I've happily forgotten most of the details of Latin but ??>>>> the number of cases seems one greater. AFAIK, there is ??>>>> no "inst" or "loc" case in Latin but there is one called ??>>>> the ablative. ??>> ??>>> No locative? I think you are wrong on that one. It's ??>>> just not very common. ??>> ??>>> As for the ablative, it includes the instrumental, I ??>>> believe. ??>> ??>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin ??>> ??>> Without looking at the Wiki article, to the best of my ??>> knowledge, I'd never heard of the locative in Latin. S> I believe that you have never heard of it, but it is there, S> barely. S> Here's more about it: S> http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/ln.html S> It has a table, showing all seven cases with the following note: S> The listed sources are inconsistent on how the locative is S> formed, so the above table might not agree with your S> textbook. There is agreement among my textbooks that in the S> first and second declension, the locative singular is S> identical with the genitive form, and that in plurals it is S> always the same as the dative-ablative form. Where they S> differ is in the locative forms for the singulars of the S> third, fourth and fifth declension. (It probably never S> occurs in the fifth declension!) For third declension S> singular, some say that it may take either the dative or the S> ablative form, while others say it takes the dative form. S> (Most of the examples they give seem to be the same as the S> dative in form.) For fourth declension singular, one says S> the dative forms are used, but the only actual example seems S> to be the fourth declension word domus whose locative is S> domi. But domus affords other problems since it was moving S> from fourth to second declension in classical times, and S> this form is consistent with its second declension paradigm. Thanks for all the information. Now I am reminded why I detested Latin and did not keep any text books after I passed the state test at the minimal level! I guess the world can be divided into those who enjoy learning cases and tenses and those who don't. I remember being appalled when I heard someone saying something like how fascinated he was when he found out that Greek had more tenses than Latin. I have a working knowledge of French with its two genders but I never achieved more than a reading ability in German and Russian with three. James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Thanks for all the information. Now I am reminded why I detested > Latin and did not keep any text books after I passed the state [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > two genders but I never achieved more than a reading ability in > German and Russian with three. Being used to a mother tongue with seven cases, and also, already speaking fluent German at the time (no English yet), I was not put off by Latin in any way. By now, though, all of my Latin is gone, as I never used it, not even a little bit. SignatureSkitt Wer kann das bezahlen, wer hat das bestellt ... Skitt filted: >Being used to a mother tongue with seven cases, and also, already speaking >fluent German at the time (no English yet), I was not put off by Latin in >any way. By now, though, all of my Latin is gone, as I never used it, not >even a little bit. The coal-mining exams are down the hall, third door on the left....r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? On Apr 21, 5:14 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote: > Thanks for all the information. Now I am reminded why I detested > Latin and did not keep any text books after I passed the state [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > two genders but I never achieved more than a reading ability in > German and Russian with three. Do you have any trouble with English he/him, she/her, they/them, I/me, we/us? Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:18:45 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >On Apr 21, 5:14 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Do you have any trouble with English he/him, she/her, they/them, I/me, >we/us? Right, such stuff is fully automatic (in Dutch too) and no trouble at all. Not to a native speaker or advanced learner. And this automation can be learned at a later age too, because I have some of it in German too (although certainly not as robust as native speakers have it). SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com >>Do you have any trouble with English he/him, she/her, they/them, I/me, >>we/us? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >can be learned at a later age too, because I have some of it in German >too (although certainly not as robust as native speakers have it). But in English, we only have "the" for the definite article, whereas in Dutch you have "het" and "de" - sort of like e.g. French with its "le" and "la". But with French for some reason I have much less problem choosing the correct article. In Dutch I am convinced that it is a completely hopeless matter for all but native speakers. As a speaker I can go pretty well undetected by mumbling an abbreviated dental phoneme of some sort - so that the casual listener doesn't detect I got it wrong. But if I have to write anything down, I am immediately exposed as the error can't be masked. Jitze (Het lul van de houten paard in de kofschip) > Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:18:45 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > can be learned at a later age too, because I have some of it in German > too (although certainly not as robust as native speakers have it). Clearly, it is not automatic in English. We have always had considerable variation in the use of pronouns in various dialects, while now we have the almost accepted use of "between you and I". SignatureRob Bannister > > Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:18:45 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > variation in the use of pronouns in various dialects, while now we have > the almost accepted use of "between you and I". Name a dialect with "considerable variation." "Between you and I" speakers have a different rule from you. "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote... >> > Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:18:45 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" >> > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> have >> the almost accepted use of "between you and I". > Name a dialect with "considerable variation." Maybe not a "considerable" variation, but how about singular "us"? My experience is that it doesn't occur in some (all?) USan dialects. John. > "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote... > >> > Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:18:45 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Maybe not a "considerable" variation, but how about singular "us"? My > experience is that it doesn't occur in some (all?) USan dialects. My experience agrees: it doesn't occur in USan dialects. Or say what you're talking about. On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:28:49 GMT, John Atkinson <johnacko@bigpond.com> wrote in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: [...] > Maybe not a "considerable" variation, but how about > singular "us"? My experience is that it doesn't occur in > some (all?) USan dialects. As in 'Give us a kiss, love', for instance? Not U.S. in my experience. Brian > On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:28:49 GMT, John Atkinson > <johnacko@bigpond.com> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > As in 'Give us a kiss, love', for instance? Not U.S. in my > experience. But I don't really know the origins of "Hallelujah, I'm a Bum". "Hallelujah, give us a handout to revive us again". Twice in the same sentence, but the singer is singularly emphatic. > But I don't really know the origins of "Hallelujah, I'm a Bum". According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallelujah,_I'm_a_Bum it's American, possibly written by Harry McClintock in 1897. > "Hallelujah, give us a handout to revive us again". > Twice in the same sentence, but the singer is singularly emphatic. It's not clear that he's emphatically singular there, though. Interestingly, the Wikipedia article also quotes a New Christy Minstrels version, in which it's changed to "gimme". The article also gives a clue to the line though, by saying Sung to the tune of "Revive Us Again", the song was printed by the Industrial Workers of the World in 1908, and adopted by its Spokane branch as their anthem later that year. The success of their free speech campaign of 1909 led to its widespread popularity. If that's true, the "revive us again" may just have been lifted from the lyrics to an earlier song. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |"It makes you wonder if there is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |anything to astrology after all." Palo Alto, CA 94304 | |"Oh, there is," said Susan. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |"Delusion, wishful thinking and (650)857-7572 |gullibility." http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > But I don't really know the origins of "Hallelujah, I'm a Bum". > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ Hallelujah! Thine the glory Hallelujah! Amen! Hallelujah! Thine the glory Revive us again. http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/r/e/reviveus.htm So "Give us a handout" is a Wobbly addition. But I've never thought of the "us" in either version of the song as having anything but plural reference. Ross Clark >> But I don't really know the origins of "Hallelujah, I'm a Bum". > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > If that's true, the "revive us again" may just have been lifted from > the lyrics to an earlier song. A hymn, indeed. Lyrics from 1863: We praise Thee, O God! For the Son of Thy love, For Jesus Who died, And is now gone above. Hallelujah! Thine the glory. Hallelujah! Amen. Hallelujah! Thine the glory. Revive us again. http://junior.apk.net/~bmames/ht0248_.htm >> But I don't really know the origins of "Hallelujah, I'm a Bum". > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > If that's true, the "revive us again" may just have been lifted from > the lyrics to an earlier song. I'd bet it was a parody of a revivalist hymn. If Roland Hutchinson were here, he'd probably even know which one. But that reminds me of an Australian party piece, an antiphon which, as you have not heard it, I shall now proceed to relate. They're pulling the old pub down. Boo! But they're building a new one. Hooray! They're not going to sell beer. Boo! They're going to give it away. Hooray! They're not going to give it away in glasses. Boo! They're going to give it away in buckets. Hooray! The buckets will have holes in them. Boo! But they're going to catch the beer in the bath tub. Hooray! But the plug will be out. Boo! And the beer will flow into the river. [All sing:] Shall we gather at the river, ... SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >>Clearly, it is not automatic in English. We have always had considerable >>variation in the use of pronouns in various dialects, while now we have >>the almost accepted use of "between you and I". > > Name a dialect with "considerable variation." That is not quite what I meant. I meant that the use of "me/us" as a subject is common to a number of English dialects, as is "he/she" as an object in others. In addition, we have non-standard pronouns like "youse, y'all, tha" and no doubt others that occur in some dialects. > "Between you and I" speakers have a different rule from you. Of course, each dialect has its own rules. I was not disputing that, but it is not automatic for speakers of all English dialects to distinguish between nominative and accusative (or possibly even between singular and plural, although I doubt that). SignatureRob Bannister Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:14:50 GMT: "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton@verizon.not>: in sci.lang: >Thanks for all the information. Now I am reminded why I detested >Latin and did not keep any text books after I passed the state >test at the minimal level! I guess the world can be divided into >those who enjoy learning cases and tenses and those who don't. I only learned Latin (well, I was supposed to but didn't!) for one year, when 13/14. Now, some 40 years later, seeing http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/ln.html , and knowing you don't learn complicated stuff all at once but step by step and by a lot of exposure, it doesn't seem at all difficult and I realise I could easily have learnt it back then. It's no more complicated than today's Portuguese (or Spanish) verb conjugations (including irregulars) which I now practically know by heart without having taken too much effort. >remember being appalled when I heard someone saying something >like how fascinated he was when he found out that Greek had more >tenses than Latin. Don't know about Classical, but modern Greek tenses seem rather straightforward and systematic. And fascinating. I didn't learn them, but it shouldn't be too hard. >I have a working knowledge of French with its >two genders but I never achieved more than a reading ability in >German and Russian with three. In German, cases and genders are closely connected, and useful in combination, because they actually convey information. So they aren't in the way, but effective and welcome. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com Ruud wrote on Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:38:00 +0200: ??>> Thanks for all the information. Now I am reminded why I ??>> detested Latin and did not keep any text books after I ??>> passed the state test at the minimal level! I guess the ??>> world can be divided into those who enjoy learning cases ??>> and tenses and those who don't. RH> I only learned Latin (well, I was supposed to but didn't!) RH> for one year, when 13/14. Now, some 40 years later, seeing RH> http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/ln.html , and knowing you RH> don't learn complicated stuff all at once but step by step RH> and by a lot of exposure, it doesn't seem at all difficult RH> and I realise I could easily have learnt it back then. It's RH> no more complicated than today's Portuguese (or Spanish) RH> verb conjugations (including irregulars) which I now RH> practically know by heart without having taken too much RH> effort. I suppose that I must have a mental barrier to learning cases and tenses since I've really got to work at it. I was initially quite enthusiastic about Spanish with its phonetic spelling but, without any real incentive, I gave up when I came across the verb forms. I have a fair recognition vocabulary but that's all! I can order a meal and understand a menu but, for anything else, "no habla espagnol". James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not On Apr 21, 4:31 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote: > Skitt wrote on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:29:46 -0700: > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Without looking at the Wiki article, to the best of my > knowledge, I'd never heard of the locative in Latin. You should find it toward the end of your first-year textbook. > Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record for number of > cases or are there languages with more? Of those that I know of, Finnish has fifteen, Estonian fourteen. There may be much more elaborate systems. A cursory glance at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grammatical_cases> makes me shudder. SignatureAlec Kojaev St.Petersburg, Russia [30E18 59N56] "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote... >> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record for number of >> cases or are there languages with more? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grammatical_cases> makes me > shudder. Chantyal has 23 cases, which may well be the record. Interestingly, the other Bodic languages (including closely related Nar-Phu and Tamang) have only about five or six. Classical Tibetan has seven. John. > "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote... >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > John. Hah! I see your 23 and raise you 42 (or 64, or even 126 by other counts): Tsez (Dido) language, Northeast Caucasian family. Huge number of locatives for various positions and directions, plus eight syntactic cases. SignatureAlec Kojaev St.Petersburg, Russia [30E18 59N56] Alec Kojaev filted: >> "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >locatives for various positions and directions, plus eight syntactic >cases. Note to self: never order a pizza delivered in the northeast Caucasus....r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? >> "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > locatives for various positions and directions, plus eight syntactic > cases. I fold. The only NE Caucasian language I have a number for is Dargva, which has a mere 18 locative cases (plus several syntactic cases). Neither Chantyal nor Dido are included in the sample of 24 languages with 10 or more cases listed in the World Atlas of Linguistic Structures (Chap 49, http://wals.info/feature/49). But they have a nice map showing the distribution of case numbers across the world. Looks like a useful site nevertheless, with lots of different stuff of the kind that tends to come up here.. Quote: "WALS consists of 141 maps with accompanying texts on diverse features (such as vowel inventory size, noun-genitive order, passive constructions, and "hand"/"arm" polysemy)". Worth a browse! John. John. John wrote on Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:47:25 GMT: JA> "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote in message JA> news:pan.2008.04.23.18.01.56@excite.com... JA> Neither Chantyal nor Dido are included in the sample of 24 JA> languages with 10 or more cases listed in the World Atlas JA> of Linguistic Structures (Chap 49, http://wals.info/feature/49). But they have a nice JA> map showing the distribution of case numbers across the JA> world. JA> Looks like a useful site nevertheless, with lots of JA> different stuff of the kind that tends to come up here.. Quote: JA> "WALS consists of 141 maps with accompanying texts on JA> diverse features (such as vowel inventory size, JA> noun-genitive order, passive constructions, and JA> "hand"/"arm" polysemy)". Worth a browse! A very interesting map indeed! I could not find Hindi but I suppose it is similar to the indicated Urdu in construction even if the alphabet is different. Another question intrigues me. I wonder which languages are most irregular, in other words, having a formal grammar but many exceptions to it? I'm not talking about applying the grammar of another language to a very different one.I suppose there must be some languages for which a formal grammar has never been worked out. ??>> Alec Kojaev ??>> St.Petersburg, Russia [30E18 59N56] James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not On Apr 25, 7:03 am, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.not> wrote: > John wrote on Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:47:25 GMT: > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > E-mail, with obvious alterations: > not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not The question about exceptions cannot be answered - not even approximately - because there is no clear idea about they would be exceptions to. There are models for language which formulate it as nothing more than a great big collection of exceptions. Some exceptions occur frequently in parallel than others and give the illusion of regularity. DKleinecke filted: >There are models for language which formulate it as nothing more than >a great big collection of exceptions. Some exceptions occur frequently >in parallel than others and give the illusion of regularity. This would be the "utter despair model"....r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? > "Alec Kojaev" wrote... >>> "Alec Kojaev" wrote... >>>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record for number >>>>> of cases or are there languages with more? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Structures (Chap 49, http://wals.info/feature/49). But they have a > nice map showing the distribution of case numbers across the world. I looked at that, and I don't agree with their stated number of cases (5) for Latvian. It should be the same as for Lithuanian (6-7, depending on the way one looks at them). I count seven. NGDAILV. I don't know which ones were dropped (IV?), and if so, why? Both, the Instrumental and the Vocative, while matching one of the other cases at times, are independent at other times. The article at http://ai1.mii.lu.lv/lgram-ww/nouns.htm shows 6 cases, ignoring the Instrumental case. The instrumental case matches the Accusative for singular, but Dative for plural nouns. SignatureSkitt (AmE) it's been a long, long time ... John Atkinson skreiv: > [... T]he World Atlas of Linguistic Structures (Chap 49, > http://wals.info/feature/49) [... l]ooks like a useful site [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > noun-genitive order, passive constructions, and "hand"/"arm" > polysemy)". Worth a browse! Thanks. (Actually, I got the link yesterday from my occasional browse of LanguageHat, but the exhaustion after finally tearing myself away from the computer made me forget to bring it here.) Looking on the little I'm familiar with, I'm a bit puzzled by some of the details given for the Scandinavian languages: - _Front rounded vowels_ (<http://wals.info/feature/11?tg_format=map>): Standard dialects of Norwegian and Swedish have the same vowels. - _Tones_ (<http://wals.info/feature/13?tg_format=map>: Norwegian and Swedish are equal in tonality. - _Indefinite articles_ (<http://wals.info/feature/38?tg_format=map>): In all three Continental Scandinavian languages the indefinite article is an unstressed 'one'. The written languages differ in ortographic marking of the stress (and thus number versus article), but that should single out Swedish rather than Norwegian as 'same'. - _Rhythmic stress_ (<http://wals.info/feature/17?tg_format=map>): Maybe I don't understand this feature, but I'd say that both Norwegian and Swedish have trochaic stress. They are both in the finishing stages of losing the inherited initial stress under the weight of loans with ultimate or penultimate stress, but the overall rhythm is still trochaic. - _Voiced fricatives_ (<http://wals.info/feature/4?tg_format=map>:) I don't agree that we have no voiced fricatives. Both /j/ and /v/ are fricative and contrasted with unvoiced /C/ and /f/. All these may be borderline cases where the opinions of the grammarians differ, but there must be thousands of similar cases elsewhere -- which means that the atlas is better for an overall picture than for exact detail. But I suppose that's how it has to be. Follow-up set to sci.lang only. SignatureTrond Engen - up against the WALS > Hah! I see your 23 and raise you 42 (or 64, or even 126 by other > counts): Tsez (Dido) language, Northeast Caucasian family. Huge number of > locatives for various positions and directions, plus eight syntactic > cases. Now I have to wonder what the difference is between a variety of locative cases and a variety of postpositional suffixes as Georgian has, especially given that many Georgian postpositions cause elision of the final consonants of case endings. ¬R John wrote on Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:42:28 GMT: JA> "Alec Kojaev" <AlecKojaev@excite.com> wrote... ??>> James Silverton wrote: ??>>> ??>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record ??>>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? ??>>> ??>> Of those that I know of, Finnish has fifteen, Estonian ??>> fourteen. There may be much more elaborate systems. A ??>> cursory glance ??>> at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grammatical_cases ??>> > makes me shudder. JA> Chantyal has 23 cases, which may well be the record. JA> Interestingly, the other Bodic languages (including closely JA> related Nar-Phi and Tamang) have only about five or six. JA> Classical Tibetan has seven. There's not much sign of Finnish, Estonian, Chantyal or Tibetan becoming world languages, I wonder why? James Silverton Potomac, Maryland E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > John wrote on Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:42:28 GMT: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >There's not much sign of Finnish, Estonian, Chantyal or Tibetan >becoming world languages, I wonder why? The Finns and Estonians failed in their attempt to establish an empire. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> John wrote on Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:42:28 GMT: >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > The Finns and Estonians failed in their attempt to establish an > empire. Do you suppose that the Austro-Hungarian empire was hampered by Hungarian's [googles] "as many as eighteen" cases? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The skinny models whose main job is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to display clothes aren't hired for Palo Alto, CA 94304 |their sex appeal. They're hired |for their resemblance to a kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |coat-hanger. (650)857-7572 | Peter Moylan http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> John wrote on Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:42:28 GMT: >>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Do you suppose that the Austro-Hungarian empire was hampered by >Hungarian's [googles] "as many as eighteen" cases? The language of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was Austrian German, of course. Hungarian is a language related to Finn and Estonian. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > >> John wrote on Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:42:28 GMT: > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Do you suppose that the Austro-Hungarian empire was hampered by > Hungarian's [googles] "as many as eighteen" cases? Maybe the problem was that the Austrians only had four. Abondolo in the Routledge Uralic volume (it's only ten years old and it's already yellowing -- considering the price, you'd think they could have used acid-free paper): "The precise number and inventory of the case suffixes is a matter of dispute, but we will not err grossly in positing sixteen, of which ten are primarily spatial in meaning" (44). But then on p. 445: "There are about twenty-five widely used postpositions .... A small subgroup of eight postpositions distinguishes three (or, sometimes, two) locational/directional modes by means of marginal case suffixes ...." I wouldn't be surprised if all of those were counted as "cases" too in 19th-century reference grammars. >> John wrote: >>> "Alec Kojaev" wrote... >>>>> Just an ignorant question; does Latvian hold the record >>>>> for number of cases or are there languages with more? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The Finns and Estonians failed in their attempt to establish an > empire. Latvians once (1651-1652) laid claim to parts of Gambia and Tobago, but that didn't turn out too well. SignatureSkitt (AmE) In alt.usage.english Skitt <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote: <snip> :>> There's not much sign of Finnish, Estonian, Chantyal or Tibetan :>> becoming world languages, I wonder why? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : Latvians once (1651-1652) laid claim to parts of Gambia and Tobago, but that : didn't turn out too well. Neither did much of colonialism, seen from the natives' perspective. -- Joshua Holmes - jdholmes@stwing.org Per aspera, luctor et emergo. >>> John wrote: >>>> "Alec Kojaev" wrote... [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Latvians once (1651-1652) laid claim to parts of Gambia and Tobago, but > that didn't turn out too well. Well, well, well; we learn a new thing every day. Did the Estonians ever have an empire? (I know the Lithuanians did). Signatureathel > There's not much sign of Finnish, Estonian, Chantyal or Tibetan becoming > world languages, I wonder why? Small armies, lack of nuclear and biological weapons, and above all, shortage of money. SignatureRob Bannister On 21 Apr, 09:39, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:50:08 -0700: "Skitt" <skit...@comcast.net>: in > sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > -- > Ruud Harmsen http://rudhar.com The first few examples of 'Klintona' in Cyrillic in Google News are all references to Bill in the genitive/accusative; both the first few results for 'Klinton', and the relevant Wikipedia article for what it's worth (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD %D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BD%2C_%D0%A5%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8), show '"Khillari"'s surname as plain 'Klinton' in the nominative. Admittedly, my rusty memory of Russian suggests that _Russian_ feminine surnames would indeed take an -a. (Of the current Wikipedia articles about her that I can vaguely read, only Czech and Slovak seem to append local feminine endings in the article title). Andrew Woode filted: >The first few examples of 'Klintona' in Cyrillic in Google News are >all references to Bill in the genitive/accusative; both the first few [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Admittedly, my rusty memory of Russian suggests that _Russian_ >feminine surnames would indeed take an -a. Better not let her see that...she'll start pushing for "Rodgama"....r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? > >>... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which > >>I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.) > Bart Mathias Well the personal names are not like geographical features. For example, speakers in every language should be able to decide for themselves whether they use foreign names for foreign towns or whether they make up their own. If Russians call Pacific Ocean Tikhiy Okean, that's okay. If English speakers call Ukraine The Ukraine it also _should_ be okay. Myself, I don't even object to foreign names getting mispronounced while the speaker is communicating exclusively with speakers of his language, if that (mis)pronounciation is indeed commonly accepted in that language. However, when high profile people (top level politicians, BBC announcers, Olympic games reporters) speak to potentially international audience, the rules are different. When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled for two reasons, civility and communication. pjk > When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names > for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend > some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled > for two reasons, civility and communication. Agreed. I don't think anyone can object if the pronunciation used is the closest that can be managed given the phonology (including phonotactics) of the receiving language, even if the two phonological systems are so far apart that the result sounds extremely strange to speakers of the source language. But where someone has simply glanced at a spelling which they don't understand and made a random guess as to the associated pronunciation (such as [pju:tIn] for Putin), one can legitimately complain about lack of due diligence. Strangely, in my largely British media experience, the newsreaders (who may have to deal with breaking news in previously obscure places) do rather better than sports reporters (who get team lists in advance and could presumably get help on pronunciation at the same time). >>When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names >>for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > systems are so far apart that the result sounds extremely strange to > speakers of the source language. [...] That was of course the thought behind my question. English has no (more-) palatalized "t" to replace that of /ti/. As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/. Bart Mathias > >>When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names > >>for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but > I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/. Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo? (I don't know what pear-a.s might be.) On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote in <news:35558b74-5eb7-42fb-8e8f-21273019d91a@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: [...] >> As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but >> I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/. > Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo? > (I don't know what pear-a.s might be.) Bart's /&/ is /@/; it's 'Paris'. Brian > On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bart's /&/ is /@/; it's 'Paris'. Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/? On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:02:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote in <news:bc207989-e66d-4853-8dc9-7f5662df954e@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" >> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in >> <news:35558b74-5eb7-42fb-8e8f-21273019d91a@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> >> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >> [...] >>>> As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but >>>> I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/. >>> Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo? >>> (I don't know what pear-a.s might be.) >> Bart's /&/ is /@/; it's 'Paris'. > Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/? No general merger is necessary: /Er/ is a common variant of /ær/ under stress, e.g., <parrot> /'pEr@t/ ~ /'pær@t/, <carrot> /'kEr@t/ ~ /'kær@t/, <marry> = <merry>, <carry> /'kEri/ ~ /kæri/, etc. Brian > On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:02:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > <carrot> /'kEr@t/ ~ /'kær@t/, <marry> = <merry>, <carry> > /'kEri/ ~ /kæri/, etc. Sure. In Chicago. On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 04:34:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote in <news:93e8e5d7-feed-4087-8a4b-80aca5913c31@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:02:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" >> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in >> <news:bc207989-e66d-4853-8dc9-7f5662df954e@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> >> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >>>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" >>>> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in >>>> <news:35558b74-5eb7-42fb-8e8f-21273019d91a@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> >>>> in sci.lang,uk.people.parents,alt.usage.english: >>>> [...] >>>>>> As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but >>>>>> I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/. >>>>> Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo? >>>>> (I don't know what pear-a.s might be.) >>>> Bart's /&/ is /@/; it's 'Paris'. >>> Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/? >> No general merger is necessary: /Er/ is a common variant of >> /ær/ under stress, e.g., <parrot> /'pEr@t/ ~ /'pær@t/, >> <carrot> /'kEr@t/ ~ /'kær@t/, <marry> = <merry>, <carry> >> /'kEri/ ~ /kæri/, etc. > Sure. In Chicago. NOT just in Chicago. My folks had it, and their speech was Pacific Northwest (with some Canadian prairie influence in my father's case). I'm pretty sure that it was the norm among the people I knew in Berkeley in the early 50s, too. When I first heard the /ær/ pronunciation, I thought it affected. Brian Brian >> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" >> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/? Is there a Springfield near Chicago and does it have nuclear powerstation and a large constantly burning pile of rubber tyres? This a chance for you linguist professionals to identify which real Springfield it is. pjk On Apr 21, 4:20 am, "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels" > >> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > This a chance for you linguist professionals to identify which > real Springfield it is. Springfield is the capital of Illinois. The "real Springfield" is clearly a matter of national security, as should be obvious from the very last page of credits of The Simpsons Movie, which ends with the line "Filmed on location in Springfield, XXXXXXXXXX," where the last represents a state name that is redacted with heavy black marker. >> I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our >> three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I > aspirate them a bit much). Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same, I seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and are not conceived as being "the same". As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I remember rightly?) Some time I would like to understand what it is about Dutch accents that make them immediately recognizable, even though in any respect I can describe they are usually perfect. No doubt a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know where to begin. > On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language > acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately > between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as > they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I > wouldn't worry yet. Signatureathel Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: >As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is >aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know where to >begin. Dutch t is dental and non-aspirated, so to render an English t they (i.e. I) have to make concious effort to sound different. But many manage. One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it. Also, Dutch assimilates much more than English. This means a word like disgusting is very hard to pronounce for them (us/me), we tend to say either [sk] of [zg], but the correct [sg] is very hard. ([g] isn't a Dutch sound, but many can make it anyway. Etc. etc. That accents are readily recognizable isn't unique. We were in Germany in last weekend, and I heard a man speak in perfect German on the radio, and already after two words I know he was Turkish, even though I am not familiar with German-Turkish accent, but I know how Turkish sounds and how some Dutch Turks speak Dutch. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com On Apr 17, 4:35 pm, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden > <athel...@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will > even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it. Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of. Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >> One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but >> they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might >be a version of. Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it> becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com On Apr 18, 4:05 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it> > becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic. Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you were transcribing in your square brackets. Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >On Apr 18, 4:05 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you >were transcribing in your square brackets. (OK, I'll bite.) I wrote: > So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. So clearly the first is Dunglish and the second correct English. Any native speaker of English (even you, after a while), and nearly all non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else could it be? So I wonder, what is the problem? As you wrote yourself: > I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of. Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you? SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com > Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > So I wonder, what is the problem? As you wrote yourself: The problem is that you didn't gloss what your phonetics was supposed to represent. For all we knew, you were talking about some Dutch word. How were we to know? > > I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of. > > Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any > type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you? SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary >> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" >> <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [...] >> I wrote: >>> So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any >> type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you? Eh? It looked like pretty clear ASCII IPA to me. OK, I think we use slashes rather than square brackets, but it was otherwise pretty conventional, wasn't it? And the context was very clearly Dutch-speakers' accent in English. SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** ("Followup-To" set to alt.usage.english only. Newsgroups trimmed to sci.lang and alt.usage.english.) [...] > OK, I think we use > slashes rather than square brackets If this were the best of all possible worlds, we would use slashes where we're supposed to use slashes and square brackets where we're supposed to use square brackets. People in alt.usage.english often use slashes when they clearly intend phonetic transcription. That's wrong. As things stand, slashes versus square brackets is largely a lost distinction here. We misuse slashes with no other meaning than that what's enclosed is ASCII IPA, which may be intended to be either phonemic or phonetic. Since we've chosen to ignore the distinction between phonemic and phonetic, we might do better to use vertical bars, following the lead of the _Dictionary of American Regional English_, which uses vertical bars to avoid making the distinction. But we would do better yet to learn the difference between phonetic and phonemic transcription and use slashes and square brackets accordingly and correctly. A common misconception is that we should use phonemic transcription because we don't want to show all of the phonetic detail that is provided for in IPA. To help dispel that misconception, a reader could do worse than to read about "Broad phonetic transcription" at http://tinyurl.com/4psrtf *. Unfortunately, authors differ in their definitions of "broad phonetic", some of them making no distinction between broad phonetic and phonemic (for example, http://tinyurl.com/3kdc3d **). To me, it seems more useful to preserve the distinction made at the first URL above. (Google returns here 913 hits on the search string "broad phonetic transcription".) * http://books.google.com/books?id=LzWa5TgCJiQC&pg=PA50&lpg=PA50&dq=slashes+%22squ are+brackets%22+phonemic+phonetic+%22broad+phonetic+transcription%22&source=web& ots=NLJib3zkjY&sig=hBGZrzywdXmvjm3JrS26jA2_9Dg&hl=en ** http://lands.let.kun.nl/cgn/doc_English/topics/version_1.0/annot/phonetics/fon_v erantw_en.pdf Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:29:26 -0700: Bob Cunningham <exw6sxq@earthlink.net>: in sci.lang: >> OK, I think we use >> slashes rather than square brackets > >If this were the best of all possible worlds, we would use >slashes where we're supposed to use slashes and square >brackets where we're supposed to use square brackets. And in this context, the difference is irrelevant. Moreover, I was trying to avoid yet another useless discussion about that, especially seeing who's talking. >People in alt.usage.english often use slashes when they >clearly intend phonetic transcription. That's wrong. I haven't been in alt.usage.english for years. >As things stand, slashes versus square brackets is largely a >lost distinction here. Not to me. And 'here' is sci.lang to me. >We misuse slashes with no other >meaning than that what's enclosed is ASCII IPA, which may be >intended to be either phonemic or phonetic. / / is phonemic and [ ] is phonetic, but the difference is irrelevant here. And meaningless, because two languages are under discussion at the same time, plus their interaction: Dutch and English. >Since we've chosen to ignore the distinction between >phonemic and phonetic, we might do better to use vertical >bars, following the lead of the _Dictionary of American >Regional English_, which uses vertical bars to avoid making >the distinction. [ ] is phonetics, and that usage certainly was correct in what I wrote. >But we would do better yet to learn the difference between >phonetic and phonemic transcription and use slashes and >square brackets accordingly and correctly. And I did, although of course PTD will use every chance to deny it. >A common misconception is that we should use phonemic >transcription because we don't want to show all of the >phonetic detail that is provided for in IPA. Agreed. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com > Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:29:26 -0700: Bob Cunningham > <exw6sxq@earthlink.net>: in sci.lang: > > [Mike Lyle said:] > >> OK, I think we use > >> slashes rather than square brackets > > > >If this were the best of all possible worlds, we would use > >slashes where we're supposed to use slashes and square > >brackets where we're supposed to use square brackets. Your response suggests that you mistakenly thought I was commenting on something you, Ruud Harmsen, had written. If you'll look at my posting again, you'll see that I was responding only to a single remark by Mike Lyle, which I've quoted again above. I've also restored the attribution to Mike Lyle that you inexplicably removed. [...] >>[...] >>>[Ruud Harmsen] wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>>non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else >>>could it be? [...] >>>>I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of. >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > conventional, wasn't it? And the context was very clearly > Dutch-speakers' accent in English. It was indeed appropriately ASCII IPA in the proper square brackets. There is no need to use IPA in slashes, although what is written in slashes needs to be predefined in phonetic terms such as IPA (with such predefinitions usually assumed). In slashes I would write it "/Dis iz/," assuming /i/-not-followed-by-/y/ = [I]. Bart Mathias On Apr 18, 9:23 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any > type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you? Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce / D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/? Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce / >D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/? Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch. But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it relevant in the current subthread? SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:52:21 +0200: Ruud Harmsen <realemailonsite@rudhar.com.invalid>: in sci.lang: >Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" ><grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it >relevant in the current subthread? Moreover, my point was [s] versus [z] in final pre-vowel position. Not the correct rendering of /D/ as [D] or something else. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com On Apr 18, 2:52 pm, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it > relevant in the current subthread? Of course you snipped the remark that generated the question, so it's not possible to answer the last two questions. If you prefer to continue not to cooperate, then I will ignore you again. What do you mean by "correct English"? Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:51:04 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: >On Apr 18, 2:52 pm, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >What do you mean by "correct English"? I will ignore you again. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com On Apr 19, 2:04 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> wrote: > Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:51:04 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...@verizon.net>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > I will ignore you again. You've never found it possible to do that. As long as you continue to post nonsense, I will point it out. > On Apr 18, 4:05 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@rudhar.com.invalid> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you > were transcribing in your square brackets. You figured it out. So did I. What's the big deal? > Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden > <athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Etc. etc. Thanks for this very helpful explanation (which I didn't see until today, though I thought I'd checked to see if my question had been answered -- evidently I didn't, as your answer has the same date as my question). > That accents are readily recognizable isn't unique. We were in Germany > in last weekend, and I heard a man speak in perfect German on the > radio, and already after two words I know he was Turkish, even though > I am not familiar with German-Turkish accent, but I know how Turkish > sounds and how some Dutch Turks speak Dutch. A long time before I could understand much Spanish I could recognize within two or three words if a Spanish person appeared on TV in Chile, long before the first word with a z in it appeared. Even now, though, I don't immediately recognize an Argentinian accent, though most Chilean people say they are completely obvious. My wife reckons she can recognize Argentinians without hearing a word. Years ago we were in a train in China and there was a group of obviously non-Chinese people at the far end of the carriage, far out of earshot, and she said "they're Argentinian". When I said "how can you possibly tell?" she said "they move like Argentinians". Anyway, she walked down to listen to them and reported that they were indeed Argentinian. Signatureathel > > Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden > > <athel...@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > -- > athel Long ago in Santa Barbara my wife and I drove past a group of people walking along beside the road. "They are Westmont students." she informed me. "How do you know?" "They walk like Baptists." Wives are smarter. Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:30:29 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: >A long time before I could understand much Spanish I could recognize >within two or three words if a Spanish person appeared on TV in Chile, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Argentinian". When I said "how can you possibly tell?" she said "they >move like Argentinians". Not as unlikely as it seems. US body language for example (movements of hands, eyes, head) is very typical and different from European body language(s). >Anyway, she walked down to listen to them and >reported that they were indeed Argentinian. If they pronounce <ll> and <y> as [z], it's a sure giveaway. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com >Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:30:29 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden ><athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: > >Not as unlikely as it seems. US body language for example (movements >of hands, eyes, head) is very typical and different from European body >language(s). There is the "nurse's walk"...they walk with their arms folded and hands clasping the opposite elbow. Since I'm married to a nurse, and spent my business career in hospitals, I've been observing nurses for decades. My wife claims that there isn't any such thing, but it's uncanny how many times you can tell that a woman's a nurse just by watching the way she walks. And, I am talking about how she walks when she's not in any sort of uniform. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida tony cooper filted: >There is the "nurse's walk"...they walk with their arms folded and >hands clasping the opposite elbow. Since I'm married to a nurse, and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >way she walks. And, I am talking about how she walks when she's not >in any sort of uniform. I'm going to have to get out those Eadweard Muybridge pictures again and see if I can spot any nurses.... (Incidentally, does this thread appear to be approaching a discussion of "gaydar"?)...r SignatureWhat good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone? >Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:30:29 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden ><athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >of hands, eyes, head) is very typical and different from European body >language(s). For those who doubt this, I would refer you to our (USA) dearly beloved president who affects a particular style of Texan "macho walk". This gets even more exaggerated on ceremonial occasions where he has to ambulate solo over a longer distance, such as on the deck of an aircraft carrier prior to announcing something like "mission accomplished". It is a most peculiat type of arrogant strut which I have seen displayed elsewhere by "mean hombres" , but never with this degree of flamboyance. Jitze > On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:13:22 +0200, Ruud Harmsen > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > I have seen displayed elsewhere by "mean hombres" , but never > with this degree of flamboyance. That particular occasion may have related to the cincture he was wearing (a la bucking broncos in rodeos) to create the codpiece effect. [Deleted <uk.people.parents>] [...] > That particular occasion may have related to the cincture he was > wearing (a la bucking broncos in rodeos) to create the codpiece effect. Codpieces are so gay! Lots of them in San Francisco. ~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~ >[Deleted <uk.people.parents>] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Codpieces are so gay! Lots of them in San Francisco. Particularly the fur-covered ones. I guess that's why the press reporter referred to him as "The Merkin President". Jitze > [Deleted <uk.people.parents>] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Codpieces are so gay! Lots of them in San Francisco. Nice to know the homophobe stares at gay men's crotches. > > [Deleted <uk.people.parents>] > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Nice to know the homophobe stares at gay men's crotches. What does that have to do with linguistics, Daniels? Petey T. Daniels wrote: > > [...] > > > > > That particular occasion may have related to the cincture he > > > was wearing (a la bucking broncos in rodeos) to create the > > > codpiece effect. > > Codpieces are so gay! Lots of them in San Francisco. > Nice to know the homophobe stares at gay men's crotches. Ah, Mr. False ASSumptions strikes again! Good boy. Speaking of crotches, I bet you used to go daily to the Greyhound Bus station in Chicago and salivate like Pavlov's dog while staring at the crotches of young Negroes. You remember them, don't you? Those Negro dudes who hung around "Arrivals." They had several pairs of rolled-up socks shoved down their crotches to look like they were hung like a horse and hoping that women getting off the bus from Wisconsin or Indiana would want paid sex with those faux stallions. And Petey, wearing prescription sunglasses, furtively staring at those bulges and fantasizing about Negroid phalli -- drool, drool -- before heading back to the University of Chicago to study ASSyrian etymology. Those were the days! ~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~ Bavarian Nazi, "homophobe" & racist >> [Deleted <uk.people.parents>] >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Nice to know the homophobe stares at gay men's crotches. Everyone at least glances at crotches, regardless of sex or sexual preference. Many (most?) people deny that they do, but analysis withy apparatus that allows one to determine exactly where a subject is looking at each instant leave little room for doubt about it. Signatureathel > [Deleted <uk.people.parents>] > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > ~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~ What is the difference between Reinhold and an onion? Answer: You have tears in your eyes when you are chopping an onion into pieces. >>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:30:29 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden >><athel_cb@yahoo.co.uk>: in sci.lang: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >beloved president who affects a particular style of Texan "macho >walk". That brings back memories of the character in "La Cage aux Folles" trying to learn to walk like John Wayne. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * [...] > As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is > aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > doubt a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know > where to begin. [...] Jeremy Clarkson does a good one. I think you have to do something with your cheeks. SignatureMike. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** > Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same, I > seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct > that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and are not > conceived as being "the same". I agree. I can tell the difference between the way I (and other Americans) say "bedding" and "betting", but I had an amusing conversation recently in which I was complaining about legal changes that would lead to the proliferation of "betting shops" but the other person (English) wondered for a few minutes why opposed the selling of blankets and pillows in my neighbourhood ("bedding shops"). > As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is > aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I > remember rightly?) No, American, but I've lived in England for a while. SignatureDo not use _literally_ to intensify a metaphorical exaggeration. People in a famine relief camp may be _literally_ starving, but it is not a thing to say about oneself towards lunchtime. (Gowers, _The Complete Plain Words_) >> Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same, >> I seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language >> Instinct that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and >> are not conceived as being "the same". It's not just that they're stored differently. They're pronounced differently. In American English, most (in cases like this, all) of the distinction between voiced and voiceless stops is carried on the preceding vowel, which is held significantly longer before (phonemically) voiced stops. So "latter" (/l&tR/) is pronounced [l&*R], while "ladder" (/l&dR/) is pronounced [l&:*R]. The same vowel length distinction is used to distinguish, e.g., "cap" and "cab", when they come at the end of a sentence and the final stop is unreleased. If an American speaker listens to a tape of someone saying "latter", and segments from the middle of the /&/ are duplicated and inserted, at a certain point they'll start hearing "ladder". Similarly if you take "ladder" and chop out segments, it will change to "latter". British speakers don't pay attention to this vowel length distinction and therefore get confused when hearing Americans. Similarly, British speakers don't make the vowel length distinction and American speakers tend not to pay attention to the actual voicing (for intervocalic /t/ and /d/) and so get confused when hearing British speakers. > I agree. I can tell the difference between the way I (and other > Americans) say "bedding" and "betting", but I had an amusing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > selling of blankets and pillows in my neighbourhood ("bedding > shops"). Another pair that often causes confusion is "writing" and "riding". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |_Bauplan_ is just the German word 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |for blueprint. Typically, one Palo Alto, CA 94304 |switches languages to indicate |profundity. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Richard Dawkins (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ In alt.usage.english Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote: <snip> :> I agree. I can tell the difference between the way I (and other :> Americans) say "bedding" and "betting", but I had an amusing [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : : Another pair that often causes confusion is "writing" and "riding". In my modest PhillyE accent, these words have separate diphthongs, not just different diphthong lengths. The first sounds like I'm starting with a short U, as in "butter". -- Joshua Holmes - jdholmes@stwing.org Per aspera, luctor et emergo. Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:22:56 -0700: Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com>: in sci.lang: >It's not just that they're stored differently. They're pronounced >differently. In American English, most (in cases like this, all) of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >at a certain point they'll start hearing "ladder". Similarly if you >take "ladder" and chop out segments, it will change to "latter". Agreed, seems quite plausible. >British speakers don't pay attention to this vowel length distinction >and therefore get confused when hearing Americans. Similarly, British >speakers don't make the vowel length distinction I think they do. I hear them do it, anyway. I don't if they're paying attention to it, though. >and American speakers >tend not to pay attention to the actual voicing (for intervocalic /t/ >and /d/) and so get confused when hearing British speakers. Probably, yes. SignatureRuud Harmsen http://rudhar.com > It's not just that they're stored differently. They're pronounced > differently. In American English, most (in cases like this, all) of [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > tend not to pay attention to the actual voicing (for intervocalic /t/ > and /d/) and so get confused when hearing British speakers. Hmmm! You've had me talking to myself (not a perfectly reliable experiment) for a while and I'm just about convinced. SignatureI worry that 10 or 15 years from now, [my daughter] will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?' [Mike Godwin, EFF: http://www.eff.org/ ] > > I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our > > three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he > > pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t > > in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty). > On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language > acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately > between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as > they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I > wouldn't worry yet. I won't! Thanks to everyone who replied. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.