If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Christopher Weeks wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote: But there is no "correctly" wrt to pronunciation, anyway, despite your prejudice. I don't want to look like I'm supporting his bigoted agenda, but do you really think this? Are you saying any pronunciation of a word is equally valid? Validity is in the eyes of the listener. In Texas, to drawl is correct. In Massachusetts, to drop ones "r" and use a broad "a" is correct. Selecting a word in common use in the news, "nuclear" we find to normal pronunciations "new clear" and "new que lar." I have to say, I think one of these _is_ correct and one is not. I'm sure you do. But if you go to Merriam-Webster, you find Main Entry: nu·cle·ar Pronunciation: 'nü-klE-&r, 'nyü-, ÷-ky&-l&r Function: adjective and one of the three sound files for that word is the one that you find incorrect, and is not marked as disapproved. In other words, your "incorrect" pronunciation is so common that it is considered a normal one, and hence "correct". Just remember that the tangerine-like fruit that you might eat used to be a norange (actually it was probably spelled more like nauranj, after the Arabic "naranj" hence the modern spanish naranja), and we've been mispronouncing it for centuries. If you think I'm wrong, do you think "cat" would also be an equally valid pronunciation of that word? I don't see that one in the m-w definition. And you are being silly. But if I understood the word, then it would be acceptable. When a little kid asks for "pasketti and meatballs" for dinner, we understand them. If an adult we don't know pronounces it that way, we might start to wonder. But if someone who is the parent of a small kid smiles and says that s/he is serving "pasketti and meatballs" for dinner, I smile back and understand perfectly. Communication has occurred and that is, after all, the primary purpose of language. There is a secondary purpose of language for some people, and that is to put on airs and to distinguish yourself from lesser beings. British nobility has traditionally done this for centuries, leading to Received Pronunciation (aka the Queen's English). Some people try to emulate this so as to seem like they are "upper crust" and some people explicitly disdain to do so, and not necessarily because they can't. We don't look down on a Scotsman or an Irishman for talking with their accents even though they aren't RP, but they are as "incorrect" as Black English Vernacular is in this country. lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A first 'Parker Jensen' bill advances | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | February 8th 04 06:29 PM |