English grammar is chaotic !

Kirk   Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:59 am GMT
<<Kirk: I detest the need to present such personal 'opinions as facts' as shown by a few people such as Adam and what you said in your last message.>>

Do you mean the message where I pointed out that many would-be reformers base spelling reform off their speech? That's not an opinion; for better or worse many would-be reformers do naturally base their reforms off their own dialects. There's nothing to get miffled about.

<<And I detest you calling me a troll when you lack the evidence to call me one.>>

You jumping to conclusions and assuming what I was saying was "whining" (no one was complaining--simply stating how would-be reforms are) with an underlying tone of provocation seemed to fall in line with that of many trolls here. If you're not (and without you putting a name down it will be hard for time to tell whether that's true or not), then I regret labeling you one, but if it's true you're not a troll, keep in mind that on this site such wording is consistently used by trolls.
fantasia   Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:06 pm GMT
A couple "mistakes" in a forum aren't enough to classify someone or even mention this someone as a troll. To be called a troll can refer to them as slow thinking and/or stupid. U can't judge a person's IQ from a forum. BESIDES, UR comment ....
<<<<There's nothing to get miffled about.>>>> refers to yourself also.

Unless of course you mean by calling this person a troll that he/she is ugly or disfigured in appearance. Well Kirk, you can't really prove that either.
Travis   Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:54 pm GMT
Just so you know, fantasia, troll-ness is not a matter of intelligence, but rather a matter of overall behavior in a given forum (or often multiple fora). For more information, go to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Guest   Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:15 pm GMT
I would suggest Kirk visit that site too. I doubt he has an idea about trolls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Guest   Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:33 am GMT
"name like Carrie ? Kerry? Cary ? Cari ?"

The first three have entirely different vowel-sounds, and the fourth is a mystery, but logically would be pronounced either as Carrie or Cary.
Guest   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:20 am GMT
All 4 have different vowel sounds to me, with Cari pronounced as "cahree". /kari:/
Guest   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:23 am GMT
Carrie /k{ri/ ? but probably /kE:ri/

Kerry /kEri/
Cary /kE:ri/
Cari /ka:ri/
Travis   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:38 am GMT
You are only speaking of dialects which are not Mary-merry-marry merged, as dialects which are so merged will have identical vowels in "Carrie", "Kerry", "Cary", and "Cari". Also note that just about any Mary-merry-marry-merged dialect is a North American English dialect, and thusly will have also merged word-final /i/ (RP /i:/) and /I/ as well.
Kirk   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:39 am GMT
<<Carrie /k{ri/ ? but probably /kE:ri/

Kerry /kEri/
Cary /kE:ri/
Cari /ka:ri/>>

Looks like Australian vowels to me.

<<"name like Carrie ? Kerry? Cary ? Cari ?"

The first three have entirely different vowel-sounds,>>

Not for all dialects. I pronounce those all the same, as ["k_hEr\i].
Travis   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:40 am GMT
I qualify my above statement by noting that if "Cari" is to have /A/ (RP /A:/, Upper Midwestern /a/), which might be what is meant by "ah" above, then it would be pronounced separately from "Carrie", "Kerry", and "Cary" in dialects to which the Mary-merry-marry merger applies.
Travis   Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:45 am GMT
I likewise pronounce all four of the said names identically as ["k_he:r\i:], due to my dialect having the Mary-merry-marry merger.
Astarico   Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:38 am GMT
<<If you want to discuss topics with me, ranting and raving won't do it. Being able to argue in a disciplined, intelligent manner with facts, examples, a grasp of linguistic concepts>>

Dudes, you appear to thoroughly enjoy ranting and raving at each other but little is achieved. I'm a lowly English student at a 6th Form and therefore I don't know a great deal about English but I do know that you can't be so prescriptive about it. You have insisted on features of English that are 'wrong', but nothing in language is ever 'wrong', merely a different dialect or a variation of the standard. Personally, I enjoy English immensely and its little quirks excite my imagination. I'm interested in the way English has so readily absorbed words from other languages but rarely their structures - English is very unlike Latin's incredible structure and is nowhere near as simple as German, despite containing all the best bits of these languages.

Aside from my own rant, I'd love to read more examples and arguments from you all as your debate rages through the phonetic alphabet and other such depths of language study.

Stay cool!
Kirk   Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:43 am GMT
<<Aside from my own rant, I'd love to read more examples and arguments from you all as your debate rages through the phonetic alphabet and other such depths of language study. >>

Well, no one was really debating about the phonetic alphabet. The posts above were just descriptions of different people's pronunciations.