"summarize"

Hello people,

Is the word "summarize" pronounced like "samurais" (plural of samurai... as in the movie "the Last Samurai")
How do you pronounce these two words?

Or do you not use -s suffix to form plural for "samurai"?

Thanks in advance

''Summer eyes'' is how it's pronounced.

"Summarize" is ["sVm@`aI:z] while "samurais" is ["s{m@`aI:z] (my pronunciations). And, yes, in English we do use suffix -s to mark the plural for "samurai."

summer eyes = samurais = sumarize

I didn't realise. How interesting.

<<summer eyes = samurais = sumarize

I didn't realise. How interesting.>>

Well, "summer eyes = summarize" but I know of no dialect where "summer eyes = samurais." They have different initial vowels.

Maybe the word 'samurai' just doesn't come up enough in conversation for me, but I've always considered the plural to be just 'samurai' (no -s)... regardless, summarize is for me also pronounced 'summer eyes'.

"Samurai" is also both singular and plural for me. The movie is called The Seven Samurai, not The Seven Samurais!

But like Kirk said, we distinguish clearly between the vowels in "sam" and "sum", so "summarize" and "samurais" would sound different to us.

>>Maybe the word 'samurai' just doesn't come up enough in conversation for me, but I've always considered the plural to be just 'samurai' (no -s)... regardless, summarize is for me also pronounced 'summer eyes'.<<

Likewise for me, the plural of any Japanese loanword in English is the same as the singular of the same word. For me, it sounds very off to put an English plural suffix on such a word; note, though, that with respect to verbal agreement they are still treated as count nouns and not as mass nouns here, despite their not having separate plural forms.

I'm with Travis on the pluralisation issue: "Two samurai are better than one."

Yep, for me "summer eyes" and "summarise" are pronounced the same but this is nothing like how I would pronounce "samurais" (though, as I've mentioned, I don't pluralise the word this way).

However, for me, it's not so much the first vowel which is different but the second ... actually they may all be somewhat different but the most significant difference is in the second vowel.

summer eyes ==>> [s6m@r\Aez]
summarise ==>> [s6m@r\Aez]
samurai(s) ==>> [s6mul\6i(z)]

The first vowels in all of these sound quite similar in my speech. The AusE /6/ (the vowel in "srut") is close enough to the Japanese /a/ that, as far as I'm aware this is probably what I use when speaking Japanese.

The second vowel in "summer eyes" and "summarise" is a schwa vowel: /@/. The Japanese /u/ is nothing like this. As well as I can judge my Japanese /u/ is close enough to what it's meant to be. The AusE vowels which sound closest vowel would be the ones in "foot" and "goose". Though neither sound quite the same: the "foot" vowel is too long and they are both in the wrong position.

The final vowel in my "summer eyes" and "summarise" is, of course an Aussie /Ae/. As I'm explaining I don't normally pronounce Japanese words in an Aussie accent. The start of my Japanese /ai/ is much more central ... maybe ... anyway they sound quite different.

And, of course the Japanese /r/ (the "r" in "sumurai") is completely different to the English /r/ and I reckon I do a pretty fair job of it if I dare say. Though the other consosnants I pronounce the same as their English counterparts.

Typo:

The second vowel in "summer eyes" and "summarise" is a schwa vowel: /@/. The Japanese /u/ is nothing like this. As well as I can judge, my Japanese /u/ is close enough to what it's meant to be. The AusE vowels which sound closest to this vowel would be the ones in "foot" and "goose". Though neither sound quite the same: the "foot" vowel is too long and they are both in the wrong position.

Note that when I was speaking of count and mass nouns above, I was speaking of things which would normally be treated as count nouns were they native English words; if they are treated as mass nouns, like "sushi" is, then they are treated like any other English mass nounts except that there is no separate plural form whatsoever, unlike English mass nouns which have separate plural forms such as "waters".

Jim, it's interesting you don't have a schwa vowel for the second one in "samurai." Since it's relatiely common in NAE to reduce /ur\/ --> [@`]/[3`] I guess that explains our pronunciation--I'd never thought of other dialects not having a schwa there.

As for the plural thing, oed.com lists it as ["s{mUr\aI] for RP, which would make sense. Interestingly, both "samurai" and "samurais" for the plural sound fine to me--and oed.com lists both.

"Jim, it's interesting you don't have a schwa vowel for the second one in "samurai." "

In AusE, there is a schwa in the second vowel of samurai. It's much like your pronunciation: Sam-mur-eye (Sam like the name). Maybe not for Jim who says he speaks Japanese so is probably more fussy about it.

Yeah, that's pretty much how it is. It's not my dialect as much as, pwerhaps my idiolect. I don't use my Aussie accent for Japanese words. I kind of switch over into Japanese mode. It sometimes tangles my tongue up though and it can take a few English words before I properly switch back. A normal Aussie would pronounce it something like /s{m@rAe/ but I've heard my mum say /s{mj}:rAe/ i.e. "samyoorie".