Then/Than in American English

Jago   Sun Jan 04, 2009 3:59 pm GMT
I hear and see a lot of North Americans swapping the word "than" for "then". For example, "I would rather do this then that".
Obviously this isn't grammaticaly correct and doesn't make sense, in context. Infact, it completely changes the meaning of the sentence.
I've also noticed that the phrase "Once in a while" gets changed to "Once and a while".
Are these all based on the fact that the accents make the vowels of the changed words sound similar and therefore the speaker becomes confused?

Also, can you think of any similar mistakes, which the British make.
Khu   Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:30 pm GMT
Here's why (and it's not a mistake, it's called Assimilation, I believe). In "Once in a while", the "in" is not pronounced as "in". It becomes a syllabic "n". This is a vowel like sound. It is the same sound as in the second syllable of the word "button". Say "button". (If you're North American) you'll hear the "buh" part, followed by what's known as a "glottal stop"*, then the second syllable is simply a drawn out "nnn" sound with no vowel. There is no "o" or any other vowel in "button".

So, the same thing happens to the word "in". This also happens to the word "and". The word "and" rarely has a "d", and sometimes doesn't even have the "a", when spoken. To prove this, say: "and rarely". Say it very quickly. do you hear a "d" in it, or does it sound the same as if you said "Anne rarely"? Now say, "Fish and chips" quickly. Either there will be no vowel and it'll sound like "fish nnn chips", or the "n" will be reduced to a schwa which sounds like either an "ih" or an "uh"-like vowel. So both "in" and "and" are reduced to just "nnn" very frequently.


*From Wikipedia: "the glottal stop is the sound made when the vocal cords (vocal folds) are (1) drawn together by muscular action to interrupt the flow of air being expelled from the lungs and then (2) released as pressure builds up below them; for example, the break separating the syllables of the interjection uh-oh"
Khu   Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:32 pm GMT
So "Once in a while" and "Once and a while" are both:

[wVnsn=@waIl=]

Unless you are speaking incredibly slowly and carefully, or are a foreigner learning how to speak English.
Khu   Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:38 pm GMT
>> I hear and see a lot of North Americans swapping the word "than" for "then". For example, "I would rather do this then that". <<

Yes, writing "then" for "than" is a mistake. The reason for this is that the vowel in "then" and "than" are often reduced in speech to just a schwa--an uh or ih like sound. This makes them sound the same. Than, or is it then, because they sound the same a lot of the time, people forget which is which and make a mistake when writing. The solution to this problem is to think "which one is it?" when writing, to prevent yourself from making that mistake. Luckily, programs like Microsoft Word will underline it, so it is not as big of a problem nowadays.
It happens.   Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:22 pm GMT
I read this recently on a website by a language lover. I think it was a typo, that's all. I HOPE that was the reason.
Travis   Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:30 pm GMT
Sorry to break it to you guys, but the matter is that originally "then" and "than" were homophones. Those two different senses were at some point changed spelling-wise, but in a very large portion of English dialects the pronunciations stayed as-is, as one would expect. Really, the only people who changed their pronunciations were those who actually cared about prescriptivist ideas.
Johnny   Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:41 pm GMT
I thought "then" was just pronounced /ðɛn/, and "than" was usually pronounced /ðən/ (or rather /ðɪn/), so I thought they were actually different. My explanation for confusing them is that I think "than" can be pronounced as /ðɛn/ if not completely unstressed, so in that case it would sound just like "then".

Travis, you say that's not the case? Then all of the transcriptions in every dictionary are wrong! Even in Merriam Webster, which is the one I like the most because it usually lists all common reductions. Damn!
Travis   Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:58 pm GMT
>>Travis, you say that's not the case? Then all of the transcriptions in every dictionary are wrong! Even in Merriam Webster, which is the one I like the most because it usually lists all common reductions. Damn!<<

It just happened that the standard varieties of English have changed prescriptive pronunciations reflecting the spelling that they both had inherited (as the spelling change predates their existence as such), whereas most people do not just change their pronunciation in that kind of way, and thus a very large portion of English-speakers today have un-prescriptively-modified pronunciations.
Impersonated   Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:50 pm GMT
I distinguish these words. I have never heard a physician or an engineer mix up these words when speaking. I have never heard a journalist or a teacher mix up these words. I have never heard anyone in my family say "then" for "than". Canadians may do this, but I stay away from them (no, that's a joke, the last part)...
Snob, I guess.   Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:51 pm GMT
I make a distinction between these words.
Seer   Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:36 am GMT
I pronounce "then" and "than" differently as well. I pronounce them the way that Johnny describes.
Another Guest   Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:23 am GMT
This one annoys me. I saw a gameshow where the post gave a clue as "walk faster, then". The answer was "outpace". It took me a while to figure out that he meant "walk faster than".

I've noticed that many British people get "where" and "were" confused.

Khu said:
<Unless you are speaking incredibly slowly and carefully, or are a foreigner learning how to speak English.>
Or if you don't speak exactly the same dialect as Khu.

<The solution to this problem is to think "which one is it?" when writing>
Or to pronounce them differently.
Travis   Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:40 pm GMT
>>I've noticed that many British people get "where" and "were" confused.<<

Umm... the two are homophones to the vast majority of English-speakers in reality...

>>Khu said:
<Unless you are speaking incredibly slowly and carefully, or are a foreigner learning how to speak English.>
Or if you don't speak exactly the same dialect as Khu.<<

A lot of people speak like that, not just Khu; you should remember that not everyone thinks like you or, rather, how yo think they should speak.

>><The solution to this problem is to think "which one is it?" when writing>
Or to pronounce them differently.<<

People should not change how they speak just because you think they should.
Johnny   Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:35 pm GMT
<<I've noticed that many British people get "where" and "were" confused.>>

I thought it was the other way around. Americans can say "where" like "were" when it's unstressed, but I think in general in the UK "where" doesn't have a weak form. Or am I wrong? Is it common to hear "wuh have you been?" in the UK?

As for "then", is a reduced form for that really common? Maybe it's just due to a pin-pen merger, or a partial merger anyway. Merriam Webster doesn't give any reduced forms for "then", why? Could it just be regional in the US?
You know me, again.   Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:06 pm GMT
Travis,

How do you follow trends in speech? I say "where" and "were" differently and I think people around me also make the distinction (professionals). Is this a trend among people who have not finished high school or college?