pronunciation of "Italian"
Charnell Litwiller
but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
R. Fontana
I haven't heard any midwesterner use this pronunciation. For
whatever reason, many Italian-Americans have found that pronunciation
offensive or at least a mark of ignorance; apparently it was once a
common American pronunciation of "Italian", perhaps especially among
rural populations. This briefly became a political issue in New York in
the 1976 presidential election campaign, I think at the primary stage but
possibly later on. New York of course has a large Italian-American
population as well as a lot of electoral votes. Georgia governor Jimmy
Carter, campaigning in New York, innocently used the "long i"
pronunciation, probably natural for someone from the South; I think he
said something like "I like Eye-talians!". He subsequently found himself
at the center of a political storm. As I understand it, Mario Cuomo (not
yet governor) was running Carter's New York campaign and had to explain to
offended Italian-Americans that "Eye-talian" was just how Jimmy grew up
pronouncing the word, and I believe Carter issued a public apology.
Today, if I heard this pronunciation of "Italian", and the speaker wasn't
joking, I would assume it was intentionally offensive or else consider it
a sign of ignorance, or an indication that the speaker came from a very
isolated community. However, other than in the movies, I've only heard
this pronunciation used in joking contexts.
RF
Dennis Gaunt
: I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
: but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
: midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
:
I grew up in the midwest and had always said "eye-talian" until I met
a guy who was Italian. He asked me if I'd ever been to "Eye-tali".
From then on it was with a short i.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Dennis D. Gaunt | Internet: dga...@uhl.uiowa.edu |
| The University of Iowa | Voice: (319) 335-4500 |
| Oakdale Research Campus | FAX: (319) 335-4555 |
| Iowa City, Iowa 52242 | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Beth Thomas
pronounced 'Eye-tye' has arisen from it and is now considered to be a
derogatory way of referring to someone of Italian origin.
Charnell Litwiller wrote in message <37F22E15...@uiowa.edu>...
Sara Moffat Lorimer
<Pine.GSO.4.10.99092...@aloha.cc.columbia.edu>, "R.
Fontana" <re...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Charnell Litwiller wrote:
>
> > I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
> > but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> > midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
[snip]
> Today, if I heard this pronunciation of "Italian", and the speaker wasn't
> joking, I would assume it was intentionally offensive or else consider it
> a sign of ignorance, or an indication that the speaker came from a very
> isolated community. However, other than in the movies, I've only >heard
this pronunciation used in joking contexts.
My uncle, from upstate New York, uses this pronunciation, and he's not
intentionally offensive (er, not about this anyway), ignorant, or from an
isolated community. He is, however, in his seventies. He also says "girls"
when "women" is more accurate. I often corrected him when I was young and
angry. Now that I'm less young and not angry, I realize it's not a sign of
prejudice -- it's just the way many people of his age and background
speak.
--
SML
Queens, New York
R. Fontana
I should have stated a generational qualifier. Similarly, both of my
grandmothers, who have rather different backgrounds but are of roughly the
same age (early 90s), use "colored" for black (African-American) without
any intentional offensiveness or prejudice; in their age group, "colored"
was the standard non-offensive term for African-Americans. Actually, my
maternal grandmother uses "colored" a bit more broadly than my paternal
grandmother does; she has also called Mexican-Americans (of Indian
ancestry) "colored".
I must admit that I sometimes say "girl" or "girls" when, arguably,
"woman" or "women" would be more accurate, but in that I think I am in
line with the bulk of the US population, regardless of age, sex, or
ideology. I generally said "women" when I was in college (late 1980s),
but a backlash against the use of the term "women" to describe, in certain
informal contexts, adult female humans younger than a certain age,
apparently led by those particular humans, seemed to take place after I'd
graduated, i.e. by the early 1990s, and I guess I caved in. (It's
possible there was no backlash, and I simply went from a very PC
environment to a slightly less PC environment).
Richard
Sara Moffat Lorimer
<Pine.GSO.4.10.99092...@sawasdee.cc.columbia.edu>, "R.
Fontana" <re...@columbia.edu> wrote:
[snip]
> I must admit that I sometimes say "girl" or "girls" when, arguably,
> "woman" or "women" would be more accurate, but in that I think I am in
> line with the bulk of the US population, regardless of age, sex, or
> ideology. I generally said "women" when I was in college (late 1980s),
> but a backlash against the use of the term "women" to describe, in certain
> informal contexts, adult female humans younger than a certain age,
> apparently led by those particular humans, seemed to take place after I'd
> graduated, i.e. by the early 1990s, and I guess I caved in. (It's
> possible there was no backlash, and I simply went from a very PC
> environment to a slightly less PC environment).
I'm trying to popularize the word "gal" for use in just such informal
contexts. No luck so far.
Mike West
Charnell Litwiller <charnell-...@uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:37F22E15...@uiowa.edu...
> I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
> but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
>
No.
The "Eye - talian" pronunciation is often the target of parody.
You might want to reform that habit lest you be considered deficient in
language skills.
Mike Oliver
Mike West wrote:
> No.
> The "Eye - talian" pronunciation is often the target of parody.
> You might want to reform that habit lest you be considered deficient in
> language skills.
Interesting that "Eye-ranian" hardly makes anyone blink, and even
"Eye-rack-ee" is almost acceptable.
When I was in grade school I seem to remember that it was considered
poor form to say "Persian" for "Iranian", but since the revolution I
believe it has become considerably more acceptable -- I conjecture
as a result of the influence of anti-mullah emigres.
Polar
wrote:
>
>
>Mike West wrote:
>
>> No.
>> The "Eye - talian" pronunciation is often the target of parody.
>> You might want to reform that habit lest you be considered deficient in
>> language skills.
>
>Interesting that "Eye-ranian" hardly makes anyone blink, and even
>"Eye-rack-ee" is almost acceptable.
Whaddyamean "hardly anyone". I'm blinking so fast, my tear ducts
can't keep up!!
>
>When I was in grade school I seem to remember that it was considered
>poor form to say "Persian" for "Iranian", but since the revolution I
>believe it has become considerably more acceptable -- I conjecture
>as a result of the influence of anti-mullah emigres.
Interesting conjecture. Anybody have real-world experience to put
into this pot?
--
Polar
Polar
<bren...@highway1.com.au> wrote:
>Charnell Litwiller wrote:
>>
>> I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
>> but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
>> midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
>
>When I was in the US Middle South, on several occasions I heard
>the locals refer to "them %%$$#%@ Ay-rabs."
>
>I know an Australian lady whose name is Alene, pronounced
>Ay-leen.
>
>I vaguely recall some other instances of lengthening of initial
>vowel sounds, but I cannot seem to dredge them up in my
>temporarily weakened condition. ;(
This may not be strictly OnT, but does anybody remember (mostly
Americans; mostly politicians) who -- after "n" years of the Vietnam
War, still pronounced it "Veeeeeeeetnam"? Feh!
--
Polar
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Mike West wrote:
>
> > No. The "Eye - talian" pronunciation is often the target of
> > parody. You might want to reform that habit lest you be
> > considered deficient in language skills.
>
> Interesting that "Eye-ranian" hardly makes anyone blink, and even
> "Eye-rack-ee" is almost acceptable.
Depends on where you are and who you hang out with. Around here, I'd
say that /aIreeIni@n/ or /aIr&ki/ are seen as just as boorish as
/aIt&lj@n/. /IreIni@n/ or /Ir&ki/ are more acceptable, but the most
common are /IrAni@n/ and /IrAki/.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Yesterday I washed a single sock.
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |When I opened the door, the machine
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |was empty.
| Peter Moylan
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Iskandar Baharuddin
>
> I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
> but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
When I was in the US Middle South, on several occasions I heard
the locals refer to "them %%$$#%@ Ay-rabs."
I know an Australian lady whose name is Alene, pronounced
Ay-leen.
I vaguely recall some other instances of lengthening of initial
vowel sounds, but I cannot seem to dredge them up in my
temporarily weakened condition. ;(
--
Salaam & Shalom
Izzy
"So I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse..."
from "My Struggle", by Alfred E Neuman
Peter Cooper
> but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
Here in the UK we pronounce it "it-al-ee-un". Can't speak for
mid-westerners though :-)
--
Regards,
Peter Cooper
Associate Editor - Webdeveloper.com
internet.com Corporation
Antonio
Beth Thomas <beth....@virgin.net> wrote in message
7stj75$71o$1...@nclient15-gui.server.virgin.net...
> In Britain, this pronunciation isn't really used any more, but a word
> pronounced 'Eye-tye' has arisen from it and is now considered to be a
> derogatory way of referring to someone of Italian origin.
>
Eye-Tye??? Hahaha :))
I'm proud to inform you that in Italy people from England is referred to
only as...inglesi.
Joking, of course :))
Antonio from Italia
Mike West
Peter Cooper <pe...@thetechie.com> wrote in message
news:7suavg$fr6$1...@lure.pipex.net...
>
> Here in the UK we pronounce it "it-al-ee-un". Can't speak for
> mid-westerners though :-)
>
Nor for the UK, I fear.
Mike
Nick Cellino
> I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
> but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
Not if they are educated or have any Italian friends. "Italy" and
"Italian" are both pronounced with a short i as in "it". Italians cringe
when they hear "Italian" pronounced with a long i.
Peter Cooper
> > mid-westerners though :-)
> >
>
> Nor for the UK, I fear.
Where are you from? I can't say I know a single person within 100 miles of
London who'd say it any different. Although, I am not accounting for those
from up North or in the South-West extremities of the country.
a1a5...@sprint.ca
<bren...@highway1.com.au> wrote:
>
>I vaguely recall some other instances of lengthening of initial
>vowel sounds, but I cannot seem to dredge them up in my
>temporarily weakened condition. ;(
>
>--
>Salaam & Shalom
>
>Izzy
I once heard a Yank say 'payroll' for 'parole', but I doubt it's
common.
If it's 'flu you have then what you ought to be dredging is Port, to
the lees.
a1a5...@sprint.ca
<ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>Depends on where you are and who you hang out with. Around here, I'd
>say that /aIreeIni@n/ or /aIr&ki/ are seen as just as boorish as
>/aIt&lj@n/. /IreIni@n/ or /Ir&ki/ are more acceptable, but the most
>common are /IrAni@n/ and /IrAki/.
>
>--
>Evan Kirshenbaum
There's always the deliberate insult angle too, as in SODDum.
Vos MC,0876208
: This may not be strictly OnT, but does anybody remember (mostly
: Americans; mostly politicians) who -- after "n" years of the Vietnam
: War, still pronounced it "Veeeeeeeetnam"? Feh!
My history teacher liked to tell about the Dutch politician Piet Nak
who insisted on pronouncing Vietnam with the same vowels as his own
name, after which some people returned the favor by calling him
Pyet Nak.
ttfn,
mcv. <><
Polar
NOW you're trying to "popularize" it?
Cease! Desist! Give over! Bug off!
We are just barely managing to get rid of "gal" for grown women.
It has been around for too )*&*^^$#( long!
However, females of non-U [1] status continue to use it, as in:
"Sorry, can't make it; the gals are coming over for mah jongg."
[1] What else can I say? You can't win in this NG when trying to
discriminate between classes, even though the distinctions are so
blatant that they hit you in the face. Unrelated to mah jongg, before
you waste electrons.
--
Polar
Mike West
Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:37f5a3fb...@news.mindspring.com...
>
> This may not be strictly OnT, but does anybody remember (mostly
> Americans; mostly politicians) who -- after "n" years of the Vietnam
> War, still pronounced it "Veeeeeeeetnam"? Feh!
Not just LBJ, but probably half the US military as well.
You will often hear Americans refer to the people of that country as
"Vee-it-nese."
Mike
(Melbourne)
Mike West
> > > Here in the UK we pronounce it "it-al-ee-un". Can't speak for
> > > mid-westerners though :-)
> > >
> >
> > Nor for the UK, I fear.
>
> Where are you from? I can't say I know a single person within 100
miles of
> London who'd say it any different. Although, I am not accounting for
those
> from up North or in the South-West extremities of the country.
>
Your attempt at phonetic spelling can be deciphered a number of
different ways.
Mike
Gwen Lenker
wrote:
If you mean "low class" you can say "low class." Of course,
there are some people who would take you to task for your choice
of words, but you are well-enough educated to defend yourself in
this forum, are you not?
GAL
Sara Moffat Lorimer
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:46:26 -0400, sl...@columbia.edu (Sara Moffat
> Lorimer) wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><Pine.GSO.4.10.99092...@sawasdee.cc.columbia.edu>, "R.
> >Fontana" <re...@columbia.edu> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >> I must admit that I sometimes say "girl" or "girls" when, arguably,
> >> "woman" or "women" would be more accurate, but in that I think I am in
> >> line with the bulk of the US population, regardless of age, sex, or
> >> ideology. I generally said "women" when I was in college (late 1980s),
> >> but a backlash against the use of the term "women" to describe, in certain
> >> informal contexts, adult female humans younger than a certain age,
> >> apparently led by those particular humans, seemed to take place after I'd
> >> graduated, i.e. by the early 1990s, and I guess I caved in. (It's
> >> possible there was no backlash, and I simply went from a very PC
> >> environment to a slightly less PC environment).
> >
> >I'm trying to popularize the word "gal" for use in just such informal
> >contexts. No luck so far.
>
> NOW you're trying to "popularize" it?
>
> Cease! Desist! Give over! Bug off!
>
> We are just barely managing to get rid of "gal" for grown women.
> It has been around for too )*&*^^$#( long!
>
> However, females of non-U [1] status continue to use it, as in:
> "Sorry, can't make it; the gals are coming over for mah jongg."
>
> [1] What else can I say? You can't win in this NG when trying to
> discriminate between classes, even though the distinctions are so
> blatant that they hit you in the face. Unrelated to mah jongg, before
> you waste electrons.
>
I see your point, but what would you say instead? "The women are coming
over for mah jongg?" All I'm looking for is the female equivalent of
"guys." ("The dolls are coming over for mah jongg" does have a certain
spark to it...)
Richard Fontana
In my experience, "guys" (gender-neutral) is used most commonly for
this purpose among people younger than a certain age. I know others who
would probably use "girls". I'm surprised at Polar's suggestion that
"gal" is used with any frequency by any significant population of
contemporary Americans, non-U or not, though I respect anyone's efforts
to revive it. (I don't particularly like "gal" myself, as it makes me think
of cowboy boots, mechanical bulls and really bad hairstyles, for some
reason.)
Richard
a1a5...@sprint.ca
Lorimer) wrote:
>I see your point, but what would you say instead? "The women are coming
>over for mah jongg?" All I'm looking for is the female equivalent of
>"guys." ("The dolls are coming over for mah jongg" does have a certain
>spark to it...)
>
>--
>SML
>Queens, New York
Oh youse goys in Queens, always setting fire to things for fun, yet.
Stephen Toogood
<sme...@mindspring.com> writes
>On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:46:26 -0400, sl...@columbia.edu (Sara Moffat
>Lorimer) wrote:
>
[ - ]
>>I'm trying to popularize the word "gal" for use in just such informal
>>contexts. No luck so far.
>
>NOW you're trying to "popularize" it?
>
>Cease! Desist! Give over! Bug off!
>
>It has been around for too )*&*^^$#( long!
>
>However, females of non-U [1] status continue to use it, as in:
>"Sorry, can't make it; the gals are coming over for mah jongg."
>
>[1] What else can I say? You can't win in this NG when trying to
>discriminate between classes, even though the distinctions are so
>blatant that they hit you in the face. Unrelated to mah jongg, before
>you waste electrons.
>
electrons that's wasted.
When RP posters get uppity about this kind of thing it's probably
because we've been trying hard to kick the old habit of pigeon-holing
people, and some of us are wary of what might appear to be replacing one
categorization with another.
But perhaps the urge for social taxonomy is too strong?
--
Stephen Toogood
Donna Richoux
[snip discussion of "gals"]
> I see your point, but what would you say instead? "The women are coming
> over for mah jongg?"
No, I wouldn't. I'd say,
My friends are coming over for mah jongg
The Mah Jongg club is coming over
Amy and Shelley and Sue are coming over for mah jongg.
The women from work are coming over...
>All I'm looking for is the female equivalent of
> "guys."
But a very specialized meaning of "guys," almost equal to "the gang."
"The gang is coming over for mah jongg" may be the closest to what you
want, meaning a specific group of friends.
Best wishes --- Donna Richoux
Polar
Yes -- independent of the present discussion -- I think it's so strong
that it may even be hard-wired. Anybody know scholarship on this
subject?
--
Polar
Polar
wrote:
>Sara Moffat Lorimer sez:
>> In article <37f7bd67...@news.mindspring.com>, sme...@mindspring.com wrote:
>> > We are just barely managing to get rid of "gal" for grown women.
>> > It has been around for too )*&*^^$#( long!
>> >
>> > However, females of non-U [1] status continue to use it, as in:
>> > "Sorry, can't make it; the gals are coming over for mah jongg."
>> >
>> > [1] What else can I say? You can't win in this NG when trying to
>> > discriminate between classes, even though the distinctions are so
>> > blatant that they hit you in the face. Unrelated to mah jongg, before
>> > you waste electrons.
>> >
>> I see your point, but what would you say instead? "The women are coming
>> over for mah jongg?" All I'm looking for is the female equivalent of
>> "guys." ("The dolls are coming over for mah jongg" does have a certain
>> spark to it...)
>
>In my experience, "guys" (gender-neutral) is used most commonly for
>this purpose among people younger than a certain age. I know others who
>would probably use "girls". I'm surprised at Polar's suggestion that
>"gal" is used with any frequency by any significant population of
>contemporary Americans, non-U or not, though I respect anyone's efforts
>to revive it. (I don't particularly like "gal" myself, as it makes me think
>of cowboy boots, mechanical bulls and really bad hairstyles, for some
>reason.)
EXACTLY!!
--
Polar
Polar
wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 19:48:20 GMT, sme...@mindspring.com (Polar)
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:46:26 -0400, sl...@columbia.edu (Sara Moffat
>>Lorimer) wrote:
>
>>>I'm trying to popularize the word "gal" for use in just such informal
>>>contexts. No luck so far.
>>
>>NOW you're trying to "popularize" it?
>>
>>Cease! Desist! Give over! Bug off!
>>
>>We are just barely managing to get rid of "gal" for grown women.
>>It has been around for too )*&*^^$#( long!
>>
>>However, females of non-U [1] status continue to use it, as in:
>>"Sorry, can't make it; the gals are coming over for mah jongg."
>>
>>[1] What else can I say? You can't win in this NG when trying to
>>discriminate between classes, even though the distinctions are so
>>blatant that they hit you in the face. Unrelated to mah jongg, before
>>you waste electrons.
>
>If you mean "low class" you can say "low class." Of course,
>there are some people who would take you to task for your choice
>of words, but you are well-enough educated to defend yourself in
>this forum, are you not?
>
>GAL
Sweetie-gal, they are going to take me to task no matter HOW I
characterize ANY class, low, high or middle, because in Amurrrrca,
we don't officially HAVE classes.
That is, except when some asshole politician is out there whoring for
votes by sucking up to the "middle class".
Howzat for lotsa bad words in one paragraph?
--
Polar
Richard Fontana
> >If you mean "low class" you can say "low class." Of course,
> >there are some people who would take you to task for your choice
> >of words, but you are well-enough educated to defend yourself in
> >this forum, are you not?
> >
> >GAL
>
> Sweetie-gal, they are going to take me to task no matter HOW I
> characterize ANY class, low, high or middle, because in Amurrrrca,
> we don't officially HAVE classes.
>
> That is, except when some asshole politician is out there whoring for
> votes by sucking up to the "middle class".
The term used most commonly in 1990s US political rhetoric is "working
families".
RF
Marion Gevers
[re "gal"]
>Sorry, but it makes me think of Judy Garland and Gene Kelly: "The
>bells are ring-ing, for me and my gal...," from the movie of the same
>name.
That's the way it was writ; but what they sang was "for me and
my ghoul".
--
Peter Moylan
Kai Henningsen
> Italians cringe
> when they hear "Italian" pronounced with a long i.
Incidentally, I'm always confused by calling that sound a "long i"
because, well, it just isn't. The usual pronunciation of -ee-, now *that*
is a long i (as in, a long form of the vowel used in, say, "it"). The
"eye" sound is something completely different.
Of course, it's not my place to proscribe how English speakers talk about
the English language. I still think it's silly and a bad idea, though.
(Someone will now probably point out some German equivalent that's just as
silly.)
Kai
--
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
"... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it."
- Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu)
Einde O'Callaghan
>
> > I know that the correct way to pronounce "Italian" is with a short i,
> > but I pronounce it with a long i. Is this because I grew up in the
> > midwest? Do most midwesterns pronounce it with a long i?
>
> mid-westerners though :-)
>
"it-al-yun".
eo'c
Mike West
Kai Henningsen <kaih=7QBNr...@khms.westfalen.de> wrote in message
news:7QBNr...@khms.westfalen.de...
> mech...@4link.net (Nick Cellino) wrote on 30.09.99 in
<37F33A10...@4link.net>:
>
> > Italians cringe
> > when they hear "Italian" pronounced with a long i.
>
> Incidentally, I'm always confused by calling that sound a "long i"
> because, well, it just isn't. The usual pronunciation of -ee-, now *that*
> is a long i (as in, a long form of the vowel used in, say, "it"). The
> "eye" sound is something completely different.
>
In the system taught in American schools in the 1950s, "ee" is called a long
_e_ rather than a long _i_ .
As a general rule, the long vowels are those produced when an _e_ follows a
consonant that follows the noun in question. (Someone will cite the *real*
rule, I'm sure!)
For example:
bit = short vowel
bite = long vowel
And this, of course leads us to:
bad = short vowel
bade= ... well, never mind
I'm not suggesting this taxonomy has any merit -- just that this is how it
works.
--
Mike West
Melbourne, Australia
Mike West
Mike West <n...@home.com> wrote in message
news:tfQJ3.32869$ei1....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
>
> As a general rule, the long vowels are those produced when an _e_ follows
a
> consonant that follows the noun in question. (Someone will cite the *real*
> rule, I'm sure!)
Sorry. Even if I had typed "vowel" instead of "noun" I would still expect
someone to correct me by citing the *real" rule.
David McMurray
The *real* rule is:
A long vowel says its name.
Accept no substitutes.
--
David
Stan Brown
>The *real* rule is:
>
> A long vowel says its name.
>
>Accept no substitutes.
That's the rule I learned. Then when I studied other languages, I had to
unlearn it.
English long vowels don't have much relation to the corresponding short
vowel sounds. Compare "bite" and "bit". The "long i" in the first is
really a diphthong, "ah"+"ee" (or possibly "uh"+"ee". The short i in the
second isn't any of those sounds.
Same problem with A. "Short a" is a whole series of sounds: "cat",
"father", "water", "ask", and more. "Long a" as in "cake" is again a
diphthong, "eh"+"ee".
Illogical -- but then, that's our English for you.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
http://www.mindspring.com/~brahms/
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
Stephen Toogood
<bra...@mindspring.com> writes
>ik0...@kingston.net (David McMurray) wrote in alt.usage.english:
>>The *real* rule is:
>>
>> A long vowel says its name.
>>
>>Accept no substitutes.
>
>That's the rule I learned. Then when I studied other languages, I had to
>unlearn it.
>
>English long vowels don't have much relation to the corresponding short
>vowel sounds. Compare "bite" and "bit". The "long i" in the first is
>really a diphthong, "ah"+"ee" (or possibly "uh"+"ee". The short i in the
>second isn't any of those sounds.
>
>Same problem with A. "Short a" is a whole series of sounds: "cat",
>"father", "water", "ask", and more. "Long a" as in "cake" is again a
>diphthong, "eh"+"ee".
Whoa. You Know you shouldn't generalise about the vowel in cake. For a
start we'll get recipes (I'm particularly interested in ones with
almonds in)
More topically, that vowel is so dialect-dependent. Over here (UK) a
Nottinghamshire or Derbyshire speaker would give it just the diphthong
you describe, but perhaps more exaggerated than you imagined. In
Yorkshire (just a few miles away) there would be no trace of a diphthong
- more like the French é (that's e-acute for Outlook Express users).
Australians (ducks head below parapet) and Londoners are closer to kike.
I could drone on for hours, but ON THIS OCCASION I'll relent.
>
>Illogical -- but then, that's our English for you.
>
Yes, we're all shareholders.
--
Stephen Toogood
Robert Brady
>Same problem with A. "Short a" is a whole series of sounds: "cat",
>"father", "water", "ask", and more. "Long a" as in "cake" is again a
>diphthong, "eh"+"ee".
>Illogical -- but then, that's our English for you.
It used to all work, you know, before the Great Vowel Shift. (ee used to be
a long version of e, i?e used to be a sound similar to "ee" today, "oo" was
maybe similar to non-rhotic "or").
--
Robert
Mike West
Robert Brady <rwb...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:37fe...@news.ecs.soton.ac.uk...
Are there many other languages that exhibit such a range of sounds for
single vowels? The ones I know about are very consistent compared to English
in that respect. Anyone know?