How do you pronounce these words???

I've been told that I always pronounced words the "alternate" way:


1* Interested 'inә,restәd
2* Director dai'rectәr
3* Versatil 'vэrsәtail
4* Data 'dætә

I'm starting to think that it's true, there's a much longer list that is just too long to share.

I'm trying to do a survery to see how much of a weirdo I really am.

Your responses will be highly appreciated. Thanks.

I pronounce them:

1) ["IntrIstId]
2) [d@"rEkt@`]
3) ["v3`s@45=]
4) ["deI4@]

>> 1) ["IntrIstId]
2) [d@"rEkt@`]
3) ["v3`s@45=]
4) ["deI4@] <<

I pronounce them like Lazar, except sometimes I pronounce interested like J.D.

I pronounce the words the same way as Lazar does.

My Aussie pronunciations are:

1) [Intr@st@d]
2) [dAI"rekt@]
3) [v3:s@t_hAe5]
4) ["da:4@]

"interested" is a good example of how we Australians tend to schwa our i's in unstressed syllables.

I pronounce them:

interested - /IntrIsId/
director - /drEk@`/
versatile - /v3`s@taI@l/
data - /da:t@/

I'm from Jamaica.

<<director - /drEk@`/>>

That was a typo. I have /drEk@/ for "director".

>> Re: [d@"rEkt@`] per Lazar, -Q-

Obviously rhotic (r-less) English.<<

Actually I made a mistake. I pronounce director as [dr=Ektr=]. I'm not non-rhotic.

But I'm rhotic as well. The thing is, I didn't really understand Brennus' comment, because he said "rhotic" and then he said "r-less", which means "non-rhotic". Combine this with the fact that you (Q) used a rhoticized schwa in your original post, I honestly didn't have a clue what Brennus was talking about. I suspect that he made two errors: he misinterpreted the rhoticized schwa [@`] as a plain schwa [@], and in addition, he confused the terms "rhotic" and "non-rhotic".

Q, just to clarify, (regardless of how you yourself pronounce the word) you don't *need* to use a syllabic [r] in the first syllable of "director" to be rhotic. I use a plain schwa, followed by [r], in "director", but that doesn't mean I'm non-rhotic. Nor does the use of [@`] rather than [r=] make you non-rhotic; they're both rhotic sounds. Once again, Brennus evidently had absolutely no clue what he was talking about.

To Brennus:

I am rhotic (or "r-full"); I am *not* non-rhotic (or "r-less"). There is a difference between a rhoticized schwa [@`] and a plain schwa [@]. For the thousandth time, you need to learn X-SAMPA if you want anyone to have a clue what you're talking about.

This thing about "rhotic" versus "nonrhotic" is interesting, because in my speech, I have an /r/ sound at the ends of words as in "bar", "more", "fear", "for" etc., but not before consonants as in "card". In addition, I have /@/ rather than /@`/ in "director" /drEk@/ and "zipper" /zIp@/ and have /3`/ in "bird" /b3`d/. Is my speech rhotic or nonrhotic or would neither term be accurate?

<<Is my speech rhotic or nonrhotic or would neither term be accurate?>>

I think for you, neither term would be accurate. I guess you would be "partially rhotic" (or "partially non-rhotic").

In a completely rhotic accent, like most North American accents, an [r] or [`] sound would be used in all those words ("bar, "more", "fear", "for", "card", "director", "zipper", "bird"); whereas in a completely non-rhotic accent, like most English accents, none of those words would have a rhotic sound (unless they were followed by a word starting with a vowel, in which case a linking [r] would be used).

<<I think for you, neither term would be accurate. I guess you would be "partially rhotic" (or "partially non-rhotic").>>

I guess then I'm partially (non)rhotic. I have an /r/ in "bar", but not "lard".

<<I guess then I'm partially (non)rhotic. I have an /r/ in "bar", but not "lard".>>

What exactly is the rule then for when you do and when you don't have rhotic pronunciations?

<<in a completely non-rhotic accent, like most English accents, none of those words would have a rhotic sound (unless they were followed by a word starting with a vowel, in which case a linking [r] would be used).>>

Usually. However, I have heard nonrhotic speakers who have a glottal stop in place of the linking [r].

In case you're curious, Lazar, Stephen and others, here's the basic rules to where there's rhotic pronunciation in my speech:

/r/ is pronounced before at the end of a word as in "wore", "bore" etc., but not before a consonant as in "board".

The exceptions are that where rhotic accents have [@`], I always have [@] even at the end of a word as in "zipper", and I always [3`] even before a consonant as in "burn".