Little words in English of foreign origin

Gringo
(“Sabe” is NEVER pronounced as “save”. And it is the other way round: in the north people use the “B” instead of “V”. The oldest spelling is with the “B”.)


If you go to Braga many people do change there b's for v's and v's for b's.
They will say travalhar instead of trabalhar and the strangest word I heard was vevé instead of bebé. Now this dosn't mean everybody does this.


What you are describing is the O Porto and interior way of speaking, once again this dosn't mean everybody does this only some people do.

(««so I would tend to think of savvy as a Spanish borrowing. Quibbling over a Spanish or Portuguese origin is a little silly, when the word in question would be pretty similar in either language»»

Not just a little silly, it is very silly. It is the same word in Portuguese and Spanish:

Portuguese »»sabe
Spanish »»sabe)

I am not saying differently the reason I gave my input was because Tiffeny said

(A difference does exist in English, as it does in Italian. I am pretty sure it exists in French, though I am not sure about Portuguese. I know in Japanese, no distinct "r" or "l" exist and they cannot tell the difference. Might this be a similar situatuion? Are these sounds you cannot hear the difference between?)

If every word that might not have a clear origen had to be fought over what a dull and repetitive world this would be.

>>Yes, that's a good reason but I think it's not the end of the world either. :-)

Yes of course. It is surely no the most important phonetic feature in English.

>>llama = Southamerican animal
llama = flame
llama = (he/she/it) calls
Llama = surname

vaso = glass
bazo = spleen
baso = (I) base
Baso = surname

Well, here we are talking about different phenomena. What you wrote is called homonyms, because they are pronounced identically, but are written differently, which are always recognizable out of the context. Such words don't arise confusion because since they are free to transit in the language as valid words, you are always expecting them everytime you stumble on them.

But the "vowel-bowel" thing is not a homonyms pair. It is a mispronountiation, and thus, a violation of a phonetic rule.

Ahora sí me hiciste reír, con el español mexicano a todo lo que da. Bueno, este tema calienta la sangre, y viendo que el trabajo de los moderadores de este foro no es muy fino, estoy de acuerdo en que lo dejemos por la paz.

Yes I understand what you mean but if I say to a English speaker with my unconcerned accent "I have a pain in my Vowels because I ate too much" or "the word love has only two Bowels" I'm sure that he will understand, maybe laughing but will understand. :-)

<<here we are talking about different phenomena. >>

We can't compare both languages because we don't have such phenomena in Spanish then I had to use "Baso-vaso-baso-bazo" since they don't use a different pronounciation for each one to make the difference.

<<Ahora sí me hiciste reír, con el español mexicano a todo lo que da. Bueno,>>

LOL! mas de uno debe esta reventando sus traductores tratando de entender.

<<este tema calienta la sangre, y viendo que el trabajo de los moderadores de este foro no es muy fino, estoy de acuerdo en que lo dejemos por la paz. >>

Desgraciadamente asi es, ni modo.

There IS a difference between the Spanish B and the Spanish V. Not pronnouncing it in conversational common speech is another thing, but I get the feeling we are forgetting that there IS a difference there.

<<What I was thinking, the V then is almost a F, isn't it ? >>

With your lips it is (almost), but like Uriel said, the V is voiced and the F isn't. If you do a voiced F, it will resemble the V sound. Or just pronnounce an English V, but don't voice it as much. Although such minor differences between Eng. F and Sp. F are hardly worth the effort and you will be understood if you use either.

And reguarding the word Gringo, Wikipedia says:

The Spanish etymologist Joan Corominas states that gringo is derived from *griego* (Spanish for "Greek"), the proverbial name for an unintelligible language (a usage found also in the Shakespearean "it was Greek to me" and its derivative "It's all Greek to me"). From referring simply to language, it was extended to people speaking foreign tongues and to their physical features - similar to the development of the ancient Greek word βάρβαρος. (Bárbaros in Greek, Bárbaro in Spanish, Barbarian in English)

<<There IS a difference between the Spanish B and the Spanish V. Not pronnouncing it in conversational common speech is another thing, but I get the feeling we are forgetting that there IS a difference there.>>

I don't know what you mean, there is no such difference among V-B or any other letters, Spanish lacks of that "need". If somebody makes such distinction, it is practically unnecessary and irrelevant.

<<With your lips it is (almost), but like Uriel said, the V is voiced and the F isn't. >>

I'm not sure what 'voiced' is, but the V it's like making a vibration in the lips to the F ?

Hi Aldvs,

Yes and not.

>>I don't know what you mean, there is no such difference among V-B
Oh yes, there is. Believe me.


>>Spanish lacks of that "need". If somebody makes such distinction, it is practically unnecessary and irrelevant.
But that's true for Spanish as well. I fully agree with you.

>>I'm not sure what 'voiced' is, but the V it's like making a vibration in the lips to the F ?
Yes, but not so strong. Just try to weaken the F sound.

Yes, when I said "voiced" I mean that you actually use your vocal cords to make a vibration, whereas with F you just use your breath. So F and V sound different in English.

<<Yes I understand what you mean but if I say to a English speaker with my unconcerned accent "I have a pain in my Vowels because I ate too much" or "the word love has only two Bowels" I'm sure that he will understand, maybe laughing but will understand. :-) >>

If you are speaking with a foreign accent that would fly just fine, but if you had say, a perfect American or English accent, people would look at you funny if you transposed those two sounds!

<<Yes, when I said "voiced" I mean that you actually use your vocal cords to make a vibration, whereas with F you just use your breath. So F and V sound different in English. >>

Yes, I was not wrong about the idea that I had about the sound. I have never noted it in songs or movies so my next question is, this voiced V is pronounced in all the V's of the word or only in the first one ?

Violence
nerVe
ViVid

I would say yes, as "nerf" (a brand) and "nerve" sound different. "Vivid" and "vifid" are different as well.

Joey

««(“Sabe” is NEVER pronounced as “save”. And it is the other way round: in the north people use the “B” instead of “V”. The oldest spelling is with the “B”.)


"If you go to Braga many people do change there b's for v's and v's for b's.
They will say travalhar instead of trabalhar and the strangest word I heard was vevé instead of bebé. Now this dosn't mean everybody does this." »»

That would be a big confusion....people either speak one way or the other...

In the north they speak with b's instead of v's and Braga is in the North.

"Vevé" would sound very strange, it is not Portuguese. Just listen to the radio from Braga online. The people of that region speak only one way, they all have the same accent and regional vocabulary.

V is always the same, no matter where it falls in a word. Love, vivid, Victoria, review, and revelation all have the same-sounding V's, in every position.

THe exception is "have", where it becomes an F when "have" is being used to mean "must" -- no one knows why! But "I have to go to the bathroom!" is always pronounced "I haff to go to the bathroom!"

(This never happens when you're using "have" in its possessive meaning, no matter how much you stress it. Weird, huh?)

("Vevé" would sound very strange, it is not Portuguese. Just listen to the radio from Braga online. The people of that region speak only one way, they all have the same accent and regional vocabulary.)

Gringo have you been to O Porto or Braga? I go to both places every once and a while.
Yes they both belong to the north but don't sound quite the same.
I agree that in O Porto does only change there v's for b's, but in Braga they sometimes can make a real ness up of things chnging v's for b's and b's for v's.

Uriel : peut-être parce que la nature (humaine) a horreur du vide ? Le "vide" pouvant être ici le caractère (phonétiquement) "trop peu" différencié de l'auxiliaire dans <have + groupe nominal> par rapport à <have to + groupe verbal>.

[hævtʰu:fɔ:mz] vs [hæftəfɔ:m]
<have two forms> vs <have to form>

Ce qui est remarquable c'est que l'opposition [v]/[f] ne semble pourtant ni nécessaire ni suffisante.
Elle paraît non nécessaire car, dans l'exemple que j'ai pris, l'opposition [z]/ø suffirait.
De même, dans l'alternance [v]/[f], la manifestation du second terme est peut-être subordonnée à la réalisation de <to> en [tə], [tʰu:] étant exclu. Je pars des principes (erronés ?) que 1/ *[hæftʰu:] est impossible pour <have to> (valeur modale) — 2/ <to> = {[tʰu:] ; [tə]}, et rien d'autre.

Mais le plus sage est de demander leur avis à Lazar, Travis et Kirk.

Ummm ... if I understand you correctly, greg, I'm not sure that just being followed by a T renders the V in "have to" into an F.

It is perfectly natural for me to say "I HAVE two dogs" and give the V its full value, while the very similar-sounding, and similarly-stressed sentence, "I HAVE to go" would always come out as "I HAFF to go."

So it's just a peculiarity, I think. But perhaps Kirk, Travis, et al know more about the phenomenon, as you say.


Regarding: "Uriel : peut-être parce que la nature (humaine) a horreur du vide ?" -- think we stole our phrase "Nature abhors a vacuum" from our favorite stepsister? ;p