|
|
A new set of questions (American English)
I'm here with a new set of questions. Hopefully native speakers from the US can clarify these for me. Thanks in advance.
1) The word "address" (as in name, phone, address information). Should it be pronounced as ADD-ress (emphasis on "add") or add-RESS (emphases on "ress")? I could have sworn I've heard both of these. I've heard my college professor say, "please provide your name, phone and add-RESS." Then the next day I hear someone ask me, "what's your ADD-ress?" I'm confused. It's the same word (the noun, not the verb).
2) The "W-" question words (why, what, where, when). Native speakers of American English always seem to begin these words with a slight aspirated H-sound, believe it or not. It's not my imagination. I consistently hear Americans say "h-why," "h-what," "h-when." In contrast, I always pronounce these normally, starting with the 'w' sound. Is this not American?
3) The expression "Bah! Humbug." Which of the following does this mean: Boredom, and Disbelief? Would you say this if you found something boring/dull, or would you say this to express disbelief, as in "Nonsense" or "No way"?
4) Is there really a distinction between the sounds of "pool" and "pull", "fool" and "full." I ask this because my college professor (as American as they come!) often mixes them up himself. He'll often say "pool as in P-O-O-L" to make it clear what he's talking about. This tells me that the sounds are indeed almost identical even to most American-born people.
Are you familiar with IPA and X-SAMPA? If not, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-SAMPA .
<<1) The word "address" (as in name, phone, address information). Should it be pronounced as ADD-ress (emphasis on "add") or add-RESS (emphases on "ress")? I could have sworn I've heard both of these. I've heard my college professor say, "please provide your name, phone and add-RESS." Then the next day I hear someone ask me, "what's your ADD-ress?" I'm confused. It's the same word (the noun, not the verb).>>
Both pronunciations are acceptable. Personally, I always say [@"dr\Es] "ad-DRESS".
<<2) The "W-" question words (why, what, where, when). Native speakers of American English always seem to begin these words with a slight aspirated H-sound, believe it or not. It's not my imagination. I consistently hear Americans say "h-why," "h-what," "h-when." In contrast, I always pronounce these normally, starting with the 'w' sound. Is this not American?>>
No. Outside of some parts of the South where the /W/ phoneme is retained, most Americans would not pronounce those with any aspirated or voiceless sound. (If I might ask, what region are you in?) Trust me, just go with plain old [w].
<<3) The expression "Bah! Humbug." Which of the following does this mean: Boredom, and Disbelief? Would you say this if you found something boring/dull, or would you say this to express disbelief, as in "Nonsense" or "No way"?>>
I wouldn't really call that a native part of vernacular English: it's very specifically a reference to the character of Ebenezer Scrooge in Charles Dickens' novel "A Christmas Carol". That is, when people use it, they do so consciously and facetiously. As Scrooge uses it, it's a way to dismiss something as nonsense (in his case, he's dismissing Christmas).
<<4) Is there really a distinction between the sounds of "pool" and "pull", "fool" and "full." I ask this because my college professor (as American as they come!) often mixes them up himself. He'll often say "pool as in P-O-O-L" to make it clear what he's talking about. This tells me that the sounds are indeed almost identical even to most American-born people.>>
Yes, those pairs are solidly distinct for most Americans. There are some areas, particularly in the South, where they may be merged, and I bet your professor comes from one of them; but most Americans (like me, for example) make a clear distinction between them:
pool ["p_hu:5]
pull ["p_hU5]
fool ["fu:5]
full ["fU5]
The same applies for analogous pairings like "fail, fell" and "heel, hill".
<I consistently hear Americans say "h-why," "h-what," "h-when.">
Do you have any audio examples?
<Is there really a distinction between the sounds of "pool" and "pull", "fool" and "full." I ask this because my college professor (as American as they come!) often mixes them up himself. He'll often say "pool as in P-O-O-L" to make it clear what he's talking about.>
I would say that there is a category of words, such as I'll/all, then/than, finely/finally, formerly/formally, pool/pull, roll/rule, fool/full/fuel that people "should" distinguish between, but often do not. "Pool" is almost a two-syllable word, and can be drawn out to two full syllables if one wishes to make it clear that one is not saying "pull". And yes, people do get confused between these words; I've seen people write "full-proof plan" instead of "fool-proof plan".
2) The "W-" question words (why, what, where, when). Native speakers of American English always seem to begin these words with a slight aspirated H-sound, believe it or not. It's not my imagination. I consistently hear Americans say "h-why," "h-what," "h-when." In contrast, I always pronounce these normally, starting with the 'w' sound. Is this not American?
try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngppTKsGssc
''Trust me, just go with plain old [w]. ''
[hw] is the original pronunciation, [w] is sloppy.
In UK they seem to tolerate [w], what's next? silent h in house [aUs], home [@Um]? It's very likely.
[hw] is still preferred in newscasters English (both US and Canadian).
It's rare in Hollywood, but then again, Hollywood never bothered with normal-to-formal speech (except for ''Star Trek'')
<<[hw] is the original pronunciation, [w] is sloppy.>>
And I suppose you still pronounce "write" with [wr\] because that's the original pronunciation? [w] is used in these words by the overwhelming majority of Americans, and almost all English people.
<<In UK they seem to tolerate [w], what's next? silent h in house [aUs], home [@Um]? It's very likely.>>
Why don't you start speaking Anglo-Saxon then? Troll.
<< Why don't you start speaking Anglo-Saxon then? Troll. >>
This person is not a troll. You are. You seem to think that anybody who appreciates and attempts to uphold proper English is a troll. This is a very weak way of backing out of an argument you can't win.
Either think of an intelligent argument, or say nothing.
<<You are.>>
I've been posting here regularly since March 2005.
<<You seem to think that anybody who appreciates and attempts to uphold proper English is a troll.>>
No, people who go around making absurd and nonsensical arguments, and bemoaning the death of the English language, and asserting the supremacy of one standard dialect over the other, are trolls. "Hwich wich" talks about them "tolerating" /w/ in Britain - when in reality, /W/ (i.e. the "wh" sound) is extinct in England and would sound completely out of place even in RP - and uses this as evidence that English is falling apart phonologically. I used a reduction ad absurdum to show that, according to his argument, he should go back to speaking Anglo-Saxon.
<<This is a very weak way of backing out of an argument you can't win.>>
I didn't back out of the argument: I made my case, and *then* I said that Hwich wich was a troll. Which he/she is.
<<Either think of an intelligent argument, or say nothing.>>
I did think of intelligent arguments, and I presented them. (If using /w/, which is almost totally predominant in England, is "sloppy", then so is pronouncing "write" without the original /wr/.) Hwich wich, on the other hand, can provide nothing more than shrill, uninformed pedantry. I would defy you to find a single professional linguist who would subscribe to Hwich wich's nonsense views.
"2) The "W-" question words (why, what, where, when). Native speakers of American English always seem to begin these words with a slight aspirated H-sound, believe it or not. It's not my imagination. I consistently hear Americans say "h-why," "h-what," "h-when." In contrast, I always pronounce these normally, starting with the 'w' sound. Is this not American?"
I have to agree with Lazar on this issue.
In my own field studies of American dialects--admittedly unscientific--I noticed that while "hw" for "wh" is still used in Southern American Speech, I never heard a General American speaker speak with that usage--they always used plain "w".
Despite this prevalence of "hw" usage in the South, usage of "w" is spreading even in that area; it's reasonable to suppose that "hw" usage will eventually completely disappear in American speech.
I don't have enough information to posit a guess about "hw" usage in British English speech.
<< I've been posting here regularly since March 2005. >>
I've been here since slightly more recently, but still since a couple of years, and it's only very recently I have begun to see your name cropping up. It's common courtesy not to call people trolls. This person was merely posing his opinion, not spamming unnecessarily.
<< when in reality, /W/ (i.e. the "wh" sound) is extinct in England >>
No, it's not. It's quite common in RP, and nowhere near extinct, I assure you, I'm British myself.
<< I would defy you to find a single professional linguist who would subscribe to Hwich wich's nonsense views. >>
I'm sure you would. Pray, how am I to do this? I don't have the money nor the right connections to do this.
>> In my own field studies of American dialects--admittedly unscientific--I noticed that while "hw" for "wh" is still used in Southern American Speech, I never heard a General American speaker speak with that usage--they always used plain "w". <<
However, do not forget the people who pick up the distinction, from hearing it from movies, etc. For a while I consciously decided to distinguish them. I also know several people who make the distinction (who aren't Southerners). I am pretty sure they picked it up the same way I did. In fact I'm positive, as I noticed that one of the people hypercorrected "witch" to "hwitch". For a while I also distinguished ant & aunt as well, and I'm not from New England.
<<and it's only very recently I have begun to see your name cropping up.>>
Cropping up? Hmm...
2007: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t6458.htm
2006: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t5115.htm
2005: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/posts/6977.htm, http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t314-0.htm
Just search for my name - you'll get over 1700 results. And you only get about 200. Not that I think I'm special because I've been here longer, but you seem to be insinuating that I'm lying.
<<It's common courtesy not to call people trolls.>>
No, if someone is a troll, then it's reasonable and intellectually honest to call them a troll.
<<This person was merely posing his opinion, not spamming unnecessarily.>>
And his opinion is nonsensical and disruptive.
<<No, it's not. It's quite common in RP, and nowhere near extinct, I assure you, I'm British myself.>>
John Wells says that /W/ is extinct in the English regions except for Northumbria ( http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22accents+in+england+which+retain+hw&btnG=Search ), and I've never seen even the most conservative British pronouncing dictionaries list /W/ as a distinct phoneme - whereas American dictionaries often do. I've very rarely if ever heard any English people use it; could you provide some examples with Youtube, for example?
<<I don't have the money nor the right connections to do this.>>
What are you talking about? I was just talking about a reference.
<<I'm sure you would. Pray, how am I to do this?>>
Just cite something. For example, Language Log is a collaborative blog run by linguists including Mark Liberman of the University of Pennsylvania and Geoff Pullum at the University of Edinburgh.
Here's a post addressing allegations of linguistic sloppiness:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002488.html
Here's a post criticizing prescriptivism: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003588.html
Here's a post addressing allegations of the decline of English:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003270.html
And I could use the academic search engines at my university if you really want a pile of articles. Or go ask the linguists on Ask A Linguist ( http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/querylistdisplay-usr-1.html ) whether they would agree with Hwich wich. (Hint: they wouldn't.) Find anything written by a linguist that indicates that phonemic change is sloppy and leads to permissiveness and language decline.
<I didn't back out of the argument: I made my case, and *then* I said that Hwich wich was a troll. Which he/she is.>
A personal opinion incorrectly stated as a fact based on a disagreement, I can not deem that as intellectually honest, not by a mile.
<And his opinion is nonsensical and disruptive.>
Then why bother replying to begin with? People are fully capable of reading this thread making their own minds up.
<< Just search for my name - you'll get over 1700 results. And you only get about 200. Not that I think I'm special because I've been here longer, but you seem to be insinuating that I'm lying. >>
I wasn't insinuating anything of the sort, I was merely saying the truth. And I haven't always posted under this name anyway.
<< No, if someone is a troll, then it's reasonable and intellectually honest to call them a troll. >>
If they really are so, then yes.
<< And his opinion is nonsensical and disruptive. >>
Actually.. it was against your opinion. That doesn't automatically disqualify it!
Lazar, my opinions and observations don't need to be identical to the opinions and observations of other people in order for them to matter. I don't remember the exact words, but I once heard it said (by somebody influential, I hasten to add) that no matter how widely believed something may be, that doesn't mean to say that it makes any more sense.
"And I suppose you still pronounce "write" with [wr\] because that's the original pronunciation? [w] is used in these words by the overwhelming majority of Americans, and almost all English people. "
How can anyone prounounce a [w] in "write" without creating at least a brief schwa between the w and r?
|