long-lived [pronunciation]
James Griffith
means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
What do you language mavens think?
Jim G
Fortunato
<fl-n...@home.com> wrote:
The distinction between meanings here is unintelligible to me--is there a
difference?
The short "i" is preferred, I think: I've only known the long sound
recently, and in either case, we don't pronounce "live" (the verb form)
with a long vowel, while "life" is a different spelling.
--
"The Moving Finger writes and Having Writ,
Moves on. Nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel Half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it."
--Omar Khayyam/Edward Fitzgerald
S. W. Davison
James Griffith wrote in message <35C60B26...@home.com>...
>I've been corrected for pronouncing this with a long "I". I think it
>means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
>critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
>What do you language mavens think?
>
The American Heritage Dictionary has it both ways, with the long I
pronunciation listed first. That's not so surprising -- we have a related
adjectival form in "live bait"; and there's "liven things up" as well.
Stowe Davison
Stephen Wilson
>
> I've been corrected for pronouncing this with a long "I". I think it
> means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
> critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
> What do you language mavens think?
Jim, you are correct. There is no question about it. The same goes for
"short-lived." The long I is the only pronunciation that reflects the
meaning. The problem is that people are already familiar with "lived"
(past tense of live). If one doesn't give thought to the formation of
the word, one sees no reason to have two different pronunciations for
what appears to be the same word. Consequently the error becomes the
"favored" form.
I am gradually becoming resigned to this process of corruption of the
language by majority error. It is inevitable. Consider the popular use
of dove for dived, snuck for sneaked, and the incorrect use of
willy-nilly, livid, and eke out.
Steve
Patronius
>means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
>critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
>What do you language mavens think?
>
I'm with you; I like to pronounce it with a long "i" because I take it to mean
"having a long life." Just as . . . well, let's say we have a rifle with a
two-foot bayonet; we might call it a "long-knived rifle" because it's got a
long knife on the end of it. No one would think of pronouncing "long-knived"
with a short "i".
But as a matter of fact, I hear people use the short "i" version of
"long-lived" much more often (almost invariably, in fact). And Websters gives
both pronunciations.
The only precedent I can think of for the short "i" version is the song "I've
Been Working on the Railroad"--"all the live-long day."
--Patrick
JR Pelland
>
> James Griffith wrote:
> >
> > I've been corrected for pronouncing this with a long "I". I think it
> > means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
> > critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
> > What do you language mavens think?
>
> "short-lived." The long I is the only pronunciation that reflects the
> meaning. The problem is that people are already familiar with "lived"
> (past tense of live). If one doesn't give thought to the formation of
> the word, one sees no reason to have two different pronunciations for
> what appears to be the same word. Consequently the error becomes the
> "favored" form.
I have never heard the long I pronunciation, but since some dictionaries
list it, I will accept it. I don't think it is fair of you to brand
those of us who favour the short I pronunciation are propagators of
error. Furthur, I fail to see how your pronunciation can be the only one
which accurately conveys the meaning of the word.
Jean-Richard Pelland
Stephen Wilson
I don't think it is fair of you to brand
> those of us who favour the short I pronunciation are propagators of
> error. Furthur, I fail to see how your pronunciation can be the only one
> which accurately conveys the meaning of the word.
Sorry if I sounded unfair. I'm just carrying the banner for the
underdog. What I meant about the pronunciation is that a person who
hears the short i "short-lived" for the first time is not as likely to
associate the concept with a short life, whereas the long I
pronunciation makes the meaning clear immediately.
Steve
janelaw
>
> Stephen Wilson wrote:
> >
> > James Griffith wrote:
> > >
> > > I've been corrected for pronouncing this with a long "I". I think it
> > > means"having long life" and warrants that the long "I" be retained. My
> > > critic prefers the short "I", assuming that it means "living long".
> > > What do you language mavens think?
> >
> > Jim, you are correct. There is no question about it. The same goes for
> > "short-lived." The long I is the only pronunciation that reflects the
> > meaning. The problem is that people are already familiar with "lived"
> > (past tense of live). If one doesn't give thought to the formation of
> > the word, one sees no reason to have two different pronunciations for
> > what appears to be the same word. Consequently the error becomes the
> > "favored" form.
>
> I have never heard the long I pronunciation, but since some dictionaries
> those of us who favour the short I pronunciation are propagators of
> error. Furthur, I fail to see how your pronunciation can be the only one
> which accurately conveys the meaning of the word.
>
First off, I understand that language is living and growing, and
that its pronunciation and grammatical constructs must change
with needs of its speakers. That said, you've got to have some
sympathy for the original poster here. One day he pronounces a
word as it has been pronounced for as long as he knows, and
someone with a newer version of the pronunciation tells him that
he is wrong.
This sort of thing can instantly make a conservative of you. I
still remember the day that someone told me that forte was
pronounced "for-tay. I took French for five years; I knew how
to pronounce the damned word. I don't care if people want to
pronounce often with a 't,' or long-lived with a short 'i'.
Hell, I can even take, "between you and I." I just don't want
people correcting me without some basis beyond their own usage.
I'll put away the soap box now.
Stephen Wilson
>
> Hell, I can even take, "between you and I." I just don't want
> people correcting me without some basis beyond their own usage.
>
> I'll put away the soap box now.
Three cheers for janelaw!
Murray White
>The only precedent I can think of for the short "i" version is the
song "I've
>Been Working on the Railroad"--"all the live-long day."
and hope we get out alive to live another day or at least to get a
life. It's English. It doesn't have to make sense <g>.
Murray White APPO MPA
wedding photographer/knife collector
ICQ UIN 660718
Deja Moo--or where have I heard all this bull before?