Which do you use? I personally only ever call it duck tape. "duct tape" is extremely difficult to say to me.
"duck tape" vs. "duct tape"
I pronounce it ["dVk %t_heIp] or "duck tape", but I think I would still write it "duct tape". Dictionary.com actually gives some precedent for this: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/duct%20tape .
Duck tape is a brand name isn't it?
I think I would call it duct tape, insulation tape or electrical tape.
I think I would call it duct tape, insulation tape or electrical tape.
<Duck tape is a brand name isn't it?>
Must like Scotch Tape and also Sello Tape both brand names.
Must like Scotch Tape and also Sello Tape both brand names.
I likewise pronounce it ["dVk%t_hep] but write it "duct tape" myself as well, for the record. This seems to be a very common pattern overall, likely due to the sequence [k.t_h:] being phonotactically unfavored (while English dialects definitely have long consonants phonetically, having a short plosive adjacent to a long plosive seems strongly unfavored phonotactically in most English dialects).
It's originally "duct tape".
"Duck tape" is a brand name, a play with words, making use of the colloquial pronunciation of "duct tape". Practically no-one pronounces "duct tape" as "duct tape" as it would be a real tongue-twister. So, most people pronounce it as "duck tape" unless they work for the BBC. :-)
Correction: unless they used to work for the BBC 30 years ago.
"Duck tape" is a brand name, a play with words, making use of the colloquial pronunciation of "duct tape". Practically no-one pronounces "duct tape" as "duct tape" as it would be a real tongue-twister. So, most people pronounce it as "duck tape" unless they work for the BBC. :-)
Correction: unless they used to work for the BBC 30 years ago.
Don't forget the wider and thicker goose tape, the prettiness of swan tape and drake tape for the manly man.
I guess it's much like "want to", "used to", "like cats", "rob banks", etc.
I guess it's much like "want to", "used to", "like cats", "rob banks", etc.
I think almost everyone would say 'duck tape' in regular conversation. For me though, this isn't only because of the following /t/, because I often have final cluster simplification; 'test' is usually /tEs/ for me, except before a vowel.
For some of Jim's examples, I think I would use a geminate consonant, since final stops are generally unreleased in my dialect.
want to [wQ~tu] (stressed) or [wQ~4~@] (unstressed)
used to [j}stu] (stressed) or [j}st@] (unstressed)
like cats [l6I?k:ats]
rob banks [r\Qb:eNks]
No geminates on the first two, maybe because final /t/ is [?] for me, and is simply elided in this case. Unvoiced stops in final position are pre-glottalized, though I don't usually transcribe that narrowly.
For some of Jim's examples, I think I would use a geminate consonant, since final stops are generally unreleased in my dialect.
want to [wQ~tu] (stressed) or [wQ~4~@] (unstressed)
used to [j}stu] (stressed) or [j}st@] (unstressed)
like cats [l6I?k:ats]
rob banks [r\Qb:eNks]
No geminates on the first two, maybe because final /t/ is [?] for me, and is simply elided in this case. Unvoiced stops in final position are pre-glottalized, though I don't usually transcribe that narrowly.
I have a relatively similar pattern of gemination, except that I seem to degeminate less in more careful speech, having:
want to ["wQ~?t_h:u] or ["wQ~4~@:]
used to ["just:u:], ["justu:], or ["just@:]
like cats ["l@I?"k_h:E{ts]
rob banks ["Ra:"b:e~Nks]
(Note that the glottalization of postvocalic fortis obstruents marked here is systematic in my dialect, but I normally just do not transcribe it.)
want to ["wQ~?t_h:u] or ["wQ~4~@:]
used to ["just:u:], ["justu:], or ["just@:]
like cats ["l@I?"k_h:E{ts]
rob banks ["Ra:"b:e~Nks]
(Note that the glottalization of postvocalic fortis obstruents marked here is systematic in my dialect, but I normally just do not transcribe it.)
So "like cats" and "light cats" are pronounced identical for you, Travis?
>>So "like cats" and "light cats" are pronounced identical for you, Travis?<<
No, as the two differ with respect to consonant length and glottalization (the glottalization in "light cats" is stronger than that in "like cats"):
like cats ["L\@I?"k_h:E{?ts]
light cats ["L\@I?"k_hE{?ts]
(The above is somewhat corrected relative to my previous post.)
No, as the two differ with respect to consonant length and glottalization (the glottalization in "light cats" is stronger than that in "like cats"):
like cats ["L\@I?"k_h:E{?ts]
light cats ["L\@I?"k_hE{?ts]
(The above is somewhat corrected relative to my previous post.)
<<No, as the two differ with respect to consonant length and glottalization (the glottalization in "light cats" is stronger than that in "like cats"):
like cats ["L\@I?"k_h:E{?ts]
light cats ["L\@I?"k_hE{?ts]
(The above is somewhat corrected relative to my previous post.)>>
Okay. I don't think I'd be able to hear the difference though.
like cats ["L\@I?"k_h:E{?ts]
light cats ["L\@I?"k_hE{?ts]
(The above is somewhat corrected relative to my previous post.)>>
Okay. I don't think I'd be able to hear the difference though.
Ah, duct tape - the handyman's secret weapon as Red Green would say.
I seem to remember one character on Royal Canadian Air Farce - was it "Mike from Kamloops"? - who always exaggerated the words as "duck-teh [pause] tape."
None of this will mean a thing to non-Canadians, I suppose.
I seem to remember one character on Royal Canadian Air Farce - was it "Mike from Kamloops"? - who always exaggerated the words as "duck-teh [pause] tape."
None of this will mean a thing to non-Canadians, I suppose.