Buoy - 'boy' (BrE) v boo-ee (AmE)

[occam]

The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
like a different word to the ear.

Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
sounding almost like the American version.

Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
between AmE and BrE?

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

It's funny to hear the other pronunciation, because apart from the
English rounding of the sounds, it's pretty much the Danish
pronunciation. In principle it ought to have two syllables, but nobody
speaks more than one.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Jerry Friedman]

I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans was
invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

Maybe Ross could check his collection of pronouncing-dictionaries
to see when BrE altered the pronunciation of the borrowed word.

This will tickle JJ. M-W11C says it's probably from Middle Dutch
_boeye_ (clearly two syllables, whatever the vowels may have been).

[Ross Clark]

Can't resist an invitation like that, though I reject the presupposition
that BrE has altered it. I find no basis for a trans-Atlantic slanging
match.

For BrE, Jones has only bɔi [= boy] from 1917 to the present.

For AmE, Kenyon & Knott (1944) have [= boy], followed by bu·ɪ [= boo-ee]
Jones XVIII (2011) has the same, though the latter is notated bu:.i.

OED Online has a "new look" as of about a week ago, which I am just
getting used to. If I read their array of pronunciations aright, it has
UK: bɔi, bwɔi
US: bui, bɔi

Also from OED Online, an etymological note to make this all clear:

Either (i) a borrowing from French. Or (ii) a borrowing from Dutch.

15th cent. boye corresponds to Old French boye (Diez), boyee
(Palsgrave), modern French bouée, Norman boie (Littré), Spanish boya,
Portuguese boia ‘buoy’; Dutch boei, Middle Dutch boeie ‘buoy’, and
‘fetter’; the same word as Old French boie, buie, boe, bue, beue,
Provençal boia, Old Spanish boya fetter, chain < Latin boia halter,
fetter (compare boy n.2); applied to a buoy because of its being
fettered to a spot.
It is not clear whether the English was originally from Old French, or
Middle Dutch. The pronunciation /bwɔɪ/ , indicated already in Hakluyt,
is recognized by all orthoepists British and American; but /bɔɪ/ is
universal among sailors, and now prevalent in England: Annandale's
Imperial Dictionary, 1885, has /bɔɪ/ or /bwɔɪ/ , Cassell's Encyclopædic
Dict., 1879, says ‘u silent’. Some orthoepists give /buɪ/ .

[Jerry Friedman]

On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
(The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.

(I copied those backslashes from Merriam-Webster.)

http://triggs.djvu.org/century-dictionary.com/djvu2jpgframes.php?volno=01&page=0722&query=buoy

--
Jerry Friedman

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:

What is supposed to be tickling about that?
It is hardly news that many nautical words in many languages
derive from Dutch.

In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
This is not unusual, many medieval words had lost their
final semi-mute last syallable. (poorte -> poort)

'Boei' verb 'boeien' is also used for many things
that limit mobility in some way, like 'handboeien' (E. hand cuffs)

Also figuratively, for 'captures or holds the attention'.
'Boeiend' -> 'Captivating'.

And from there, back to two syllables,
as denigrating exclamation: 'Boeie!'
for English 'don't care', 'of no interest', 'don't want to know'.

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
[-]

> On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
> two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
> which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
> (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
> accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
> know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.

The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.
Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)

Jan

[phil]

Much apparent in the coverage of the war in Oekraine, where Poetin and
Sjojgoe are oft quoted, and the fighting is intense around Bachmoet.

[J. J. Lodder]

phil <ph...@anonymous.invalid> wrote:

> On 22/08/2023 10:54, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [-]
> >> On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
> >> two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
> >> which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
> >> (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
> >> accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
> >> know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.
> >
> > The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
> > It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
> > and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.
> > Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
> > like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)
>

> Much apparent in the coverage of the war in Oekraine, where Poetin and
> Sjojgoe are oft quoted, and the fighting is intense around Bachmoet.

Yes, and not just for Dutch. (and also for ch-> kh, and others)

The quoted transliteration of Russian words and names
is often a dead give-away of the national origin of the author.
And why not?
Why should the whole world use English transliterations?

As for Dutch, there are different style guides,
and usage differs somewhat,

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2023-08-22 11:34:10 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> phil <ph...@anonymous.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 22/08/2023 10:54, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> [-]
>>>> On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
>>>> two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
>>>> which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
>>>> (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
>>>> accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
>>>> know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.
>>>
>>> The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
>>> It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
>>> and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.
>>> Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
>>> like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)
>>
>> Much apparent in the coverage of the war in Oekraine, where Poetin and
>> Sjojgoe are oft quoted, and the fighting is intense around Bachmoet.
>
> Yes, and not just for Dutch. (and also for ch-> kh, and others)
>
> The quoted transliteration of Russian words and names
> is often a dead give-away of the national origin of the author.

Khrushchov was a notable example. Most British news sources had
Khrushchev or Khruschev. German had Chruschtschow, French had
Khrouchtchev, Dutch had Chroesjtsjov (that's what Wikipedia says, but
you may know better), Hungarian had Hruscsov (Wikipedia again), Spanish
had Jrushchov, Italian had Chruščëv (Wikipedia again, but I'm
suspicious as Italian doesn't usually have š, č or ë). German is the
winner for needing a series of seven letters to represent one letter
(щ) of Russian.

> And why not?
> Why should the whole world use English transliterations?

Because the whole world is supposed to follow USA preferences in all matters.

>
> As for Dutch, there are different style guides,
> and usage differs somewhat,
>
> Jan

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

[Silvano]

Athel Cornish-Bowden hat am 22.08.2023 um 14:20 geschrieben:

> Khrushchov was a notable example. Most British news sources had
> Khrushchev or Khruschev. German had Chruschtschow, French had
> Khrouchtchev, Dutch had Chroesjtsjov (that's what Wikipedia says, but
> you may know better), Hungarian had Hruscsov (Wikipedia again), Spanish
> had Jrushchov, Italian had Chruščëv (Wikipedia again, but I'm suspicious
> as Italian doesn't usually have š, č or ë). German is the winner for
> needing a series of seven letters to represent one letter (щ) of Russian.

Your suspicion is correct, as the first few lines of the Italian
Wikipedia confirm: ... "spesso trascritto in italiano come Krusciov".
Actually, Italian newspapers and magazines did not _often_ write that
name as Krusciov, as Wikipedia states. They _always_ wrote Krusciov,
like they _never_ wrote the correct Wałęsa. It is always Walesa.

Chruščëv is the scientific transliteration of Cyrillic, often quite
different from its transcription and not dependent on the writer's language.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:54:13 AM UTC-6, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [-]
> > On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
> > two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
> > which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
> > (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
> > accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
> > know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.

> The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
> It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
> and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.

Thanks, but as I said, the symbol in the second pronunciation represents
the vowel of "boat", not that of "boot".

> Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
> like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)

At first I thought you meant that Dutch usage differs from that of
other languages, but once I noticed that didn't sense, I realized you
meant that some Dutch people use a different method.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

...

Keep going. I think you and Jan have missed a few pieces of straw.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

There ya go. "All orthoepists" make it disyllabic as far back as Hakluyt
(16th c.). Being a nautical term, it would have come with the first
adventurers and settlers in the New World, and so its prevalence in
AmE is merely yet another example of the conservative periphery vs.
the innovative center. The monosyllabification seems to have taken
hold in the later 19th century,

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:54:12 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:

> > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > between AmE and BrE?
> > Maybe Ross could check his collection of pronouncing-dictionaries
> > to see when BrE altered the pronunciation of the borrowed word.
> > This will tickle JJ. M-W11C says it's probably from Middle Dutch
> > _boeye_ (clearly two syllables, whatever the vowels may have been).
>
> What is supposed to be tickling about that?

You think all things Dutch are superior to all things anything else.
(An alternative gets it from French, see Jerry's quote.)

> It is hardly news that many nautical words in many languages
> derive from Dutch.
>
> In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
> This is not unusual, many medieval words had lost their
> final semi-mute last syallable. (poorte -> poort)

The only question was how to pronounce MD boeye.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:20:49 AM UTC-4, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-08-22 11:34:10 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> > The quoted transliteration of Russian words and names
> > is often a dead give-away of the national origin of the author.
>
> Khrushchov was a notable example. Most British news sources had
> Khrushchev or Khruschev. German had Chruschtschow, French had
> Khrouchtchev, Dutch had Chroesjtsjov (that's what Wikipedia says, but
> you may know better), Hungarian had Hruscsov (Wikipedia again), Spanish
> had Jrushchov, Italian had Chruščëv (Wikipedia again, but I'm
> suspicious as Italian doesn't usually have š, č or ë). German is the
> winner for needing a series of seven letters to represent one letter
> (щ) of Russian.

Some of those transliterated the spelling, some transcribed the sound.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 9:27:16 AM UTC-4, Silvano wrote:

> Chruščëv is the scientific transliteration of Cyrillic, often quite
> different from its transcription and not dependent on the writer's language.

Thee are many, many "scientific" transliterations of Cyrillic. Americans
need to learn the cumbrsome (but accurate) Library of Congress system,
since it is used in every library that makes use of the national resources.
Here are three of them:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_transliteration_of_Cyrillic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALA-LC_romanization_for_Russian

It may have been taken over into OCLC / WorldCat, because the huge
database already existed.

[J. J. Lodder]

Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:54:13?AM UTC-6, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [-]
> > > On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
> > > two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
> > > which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
> > > (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
> > > accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
> > > know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.
>
> > The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
> > It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
> > and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.
>
> Thanks, but as I said, the symbol in the second pronunciation represents
> the vowel of "boat", not that of "boot".

The sound of the 'oe' Dutch 'Boei' is definitely much more
like the sound of the oo' in English 'boot', not like English 'boat'.

> > Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
> > like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)
>
> At first I thought you meant that Dutch usage differs from that of
> other languages, but once I noticed that didn't sense, I realized you
> meant that some Dutch people use a different method.

Yes, there are different style guides,
for Dutch news media for example,
with somewhat different recommendations on transliteration,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:

> Athel Cornish-Bowden hat am 22.08.2023 um 14:20 geschrieben:
> > Khrushchov was a notable example. Most British news sources had
> > Khrushchev or Khruschev. German had Chruschtschow, French had
> > Khrouchtchev, Dutch had Chroesjtsjov (that's what Wikipedia says, but
> > you may know better), Hungarian had Hruscsov (Wikipedia again), Spanish

> > had Jrushchov, Italian had Chru??ėv (Wikipedia again, but I'm suspicious
> > as Italian doesn't usually have ?, ? or ė). German is the winner for
> > needing a series of seven letters to represent one letter (?) of Russian.

>
>
> Your suspicion is correct, as the first few lines of the Italian
> Wikipedia confirm: ... "spesso trascritto in italiano come Krusciov".
> Actually, Italian newspapers and magazines did not _often_ write that
> name as Krusciov, as Wikipedia states. They _always_ wrote Krusciov,

> like they _never_ wrote the correct Wa??sa. It is always Walesa.
>
> Chru??ėv is the scientific transliteration of Cyrillic, often quite

> different from its transcription and not dependent on the writer's language.

How can there possibly such a thing as
'a scientifically correct transliteration'?
(independent of the writer's language???)

Jan

[Jerry Friedman]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:28:21 AM UTC-6, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:54:13?AM UTC-6, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Jerry Friedman <jerry.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > [-]
> > > > On American pronunciation, the /Century Dictionary/ (1889-1891) gives
> > > > two pronunciations: \boi\ [= boy] and the same with a macron over the o,
> > > > which indicates the vowel of "boat", but the word is still monosyllabic.
> > > > (The dictionary separates syllables with hyphens, except that after an
> > > > accented syllable a straight apostrophe replaces the hyphen.) I don't
> > > > know what the second pronunciation is supposed to represent.
> >
> > > The Dutch 'oe' doesn't carry over into other languages.
> > > It is comparable in pronunciation to that of 'boot' in the English,
> > > and to the u (without umlaut!) in German.
> >
> > Thanks, but as I said, the symbol in the second pronunciation represents
> > the vowel of "boat", not that of "boot".

> The sound of the 'oe' Dutch 'Boei' is definitely much more
> like the sound of the oo' in English 'boot', not like English 'boat'.

That's why your comments about Dutch "oe" were irrelevant to the paragraph
of mine that you quoted.

> > > Conversely the U in other languages is sometimes transcribed as oe,
> > > like in Uganda -> Oeganda, (but Dutch usage differs on that)
> >
> > At first I thought you meant that Dutch usage differs from that of
> > other languages, but once I noticed that didn't

make

> > sense, I realized you
> > meant that some Dutch people use a different method.

> Yes, there are different style guides,
> for Dutch news media for example,
> with somewhat different recommendations on transliteration,

"Varies", which I only thought of now, would have been clearer to me than
"differs".

--
Jerry Friedman

[Silvano]

J. J. Lodder hat am 22.08.2023 um 18:28 geschrieben:
> Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:

>> Chruščëv (s and c both with a hacek, for those who like you do not use UTF-8) is the scientific transliteration of Cyrillic, often quite

>> different from its transcription and not dependent on the writer's language.
>
> How can there possibly such a thing as
> 'a scientifically correct transliteration'?
> (independent of the writer's language???)

Please read
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_transliteration_of_Cyrillic>
The main idea of a transliteration, as opposed to a transcription, is
precisely that people using any language written with the Latin alphabet
should get the same writing in Cyrillic after back-translation.

My niece works as a librarian at a university. She could hold a lecture
about their problems with book titles in non-Latin alphabets or ideograms.

If you don't like the idea or the wording, please complain to Wikipedia.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:54:12?AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:
>
> > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > > between AmE and BrE?
> > > Maybe Ross could check his collection of pronouncing-dictionaries
> > > to see when BrE altered the pronunciation of the borrowed word.
> > > This will tickle JJ. M-W11C says it's probably from Middle Dutch
> > > _boeye_ (clearly two syllables, whatever the vowels may have been).
> >
> > What is supposed to be tickling about that?
>
> You think all things Dutch are superior to all things anything else.
> (An alternative gets it from French, see Jerry's quote.)

Yes, you are crazy about that, no need to reiterate,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:

> J. J. Lodder hat am 22.08.2023 um 18:28 geschrieben:
> > Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:
>

> >> Chru??ėv (s and c both with a hacek, for those who like you do not use

> >> UTF-8) is the scientific transliteration of Cyrillic, often quite
> >> different from its transcription and not dependent on the writer's
> >> language.
> >
> > How can there possibly such a thing as
> > 'a scientifically correct transliteration'?
> > (independent of the writer's language???)
>
>
> Please read
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_transliteration_of_Cyrillic>
> The main idea of a transliteration, as opposed to a transcription, is
> precisely that people using any language written with the Latin alphabet
> should get the same writing in Cyrillic after back-translation.
>
> My niece works as a librarian at a university. She could hold a lecture
> about their problems with book titles in non-Latin alphabets or ideograms.
>
> If you don't like the idea or the wording, please complain to Wikipedia.

Why? It is just another system, and Wikipedia explicitly says so,
It just has a more pretentious name,

Jan

[bil...@shaw.ca]

My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
pronouncing it Boo-wee.

I live with it.

bill

[J. J. Lodder]

bil...@shaw.ca <bil...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:12:20?AM UTC-7, Jerry Friedman wrote:

> > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:38:31?AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
> > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > like a different word to the ear.
> > >
> > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > >
> > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > between AmE and BrE?
> > I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans was
> > invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).
> >
> My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> pronouncing it Boo-wee.
>
> I live with it.

It is not an unusual name family at all.
No negative connotations, a 'boei' is a sign
that shows where it is safe to go,
and it may be a life saver, as in 'reddingsboei'.

Jan

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

bil...@shaw.ca wrote:

> My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> pronouncing it Boo-wee.

Colin Powell was given his first name with first syllable as in
"culture". For some reason many people - if I remember right, even his
school mates - pronounced it differently. He became so tired of
correcting it that he stopped and accepted the other pronunciation.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

bil...@shaw.ca wrote:

> My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> pronouncing it Boo-wee.
>
> I live with it.

I just remember:

When I was a child, my name was often pronounced wrong if I had to
explain it to someone (authorities e.g.). Either they would insert an i
making it "Bertil" in spite of us then having a couple of famous people
with the same name. You may know Bertel Thorvaldsen. Or they would write
"Berthel".

The funny thing about "Bertil", which irritated me every time, is that
it is the normal version of the name in Sweden, and if I were to live
there, I would happily accept that pronunciation.

I don't know why the mistakes stopped. It's been decades since it's been
a problem.

There are only about 400 Danes named Bertel, so it's a rare name.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Ross Clark]

Try reading it again. The orthoepists and Hakluyt attest to a
monosyllabic pronunciation /bwɔɪ/, which apparently survives only in UK.
Spellings attested from the 1500s suggest both "boy" <boy, boye> and
"boo-ee" <buie, buy>. Most likely all three existed at this period, and
were eventually carried to America. Since then, in both dialect areas,
one of the three has been lost.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Do you know how to pronounce the MD boeye? JJ clearly doesn't but
prefers to delete the query than to say so.

[Peter T. Daniels]

"Colin" is normally pronounced with [a] in the first syllable. He, however,
is pronounced the same as "colon" with [o].

[Peter T. Daniels]

That is clearly a triphthong. If you want to call that one syllable,
well, you have a funny triphthong.

> Spellings attested from the 1500s suggest both "boy" <boy, boye> and
> "boo-ee" <buie, buy>. Most likely all three existed at this period, and
> were eventually carried to America. Since then, in both dialect areas,
> one of the three has been lost.

In the center, the earliest (original) one is lost, in the periphery, the monosyllable
was perhaps imitated from BrE later on.

[Ross Clark]

If you think "triphthong" is incompatible with "monosyllabic", well, you
have a funny definition of "triphthong".

>> Spellings attested from the 1500s suggest both "boy" <boy, boye> and
>> "boo-ee" <buie, buy>. Most likely all three existed at this period, and
>> were eventually carried to America. Since then, in both dialect areas,
>> one of the three has been lost.
>
> In the center, the earliest (original) one is lost,

You're really desperate to score your little points, aren't you?
You assume (on no evidence) that "boo-ee" is the "earliest (original)";
then I suppose you will argue that losing the "earliest" is more
innovative than losing one of the others.

in the periphery, the monosyllable
> was perhaps imitated from BrE later on.

Again, no evidence for "imitated" (whatever you mean by that) or "later on".
--------------
But I thought Webster's New International Dictionary (1909) deserved
another of its rare outings, just to see what it made of this word.
Three pronunciations given:
boi;
boo'ĭ [with ligature over the oo's];
bwoi

followed by

277: the first is the universal nautical pronunciation and has now
generally prevailed over the others
------------------------
The "nautical" note agrees well with OED's observation about sailors
(probably dating from 1888).
(277 turns out to be a reference to a table showing pronunciations in
other dictionaries, which adds nothing of interest.)

So we have /bwoi/ attested in AmE. In fact, in Webster's _An American
Dictionary of the English Language_ (1830), (bwoy) is the only
pronunciation given.

https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=EohAAAAAYAAJ&newbks=0&hl=en&redir_esc=y

And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
some modern affectation.

[Ross Clark]

Just a little further -- managed to get into Walker's _Critical
Pronouncing Dictionary_ (1791).

https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/A_Critical_Pronouncing_Dictionary_and_Ex.html?id=DaURAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y

His entry for "buoy" gives the pronunciation <buoe>, with a tiny
numeral over each vowel. These diacritics (which I have mentioned before
here) are almost unreadable, but the best I can guess is that it means
something like [bʊɔi].

Fortunately on p.39 he has a note about this very word which is much
clearer:

"UOY: This triphthong is found only in the word buoy, pronounced as if
written _bwoy_, but too often exactly like _boy_. This, however, is an
impropriety which ought to be avoided by correct speakers."

So the two common BrE pronunciations in the late 18th century were, as
OED has them today, "bwoy" and "boy". But Walker disapproved of the latter.

[Ross Clark]

Johnson didn't! Johnson's dictionary (1755) has only occasional notes on
pronunciation. For the noun "buoy" he gives only etymological notes
(French and Spanish); but the verb, he says, is derived from the noun,
and "the u is silent in both". I.e. "boy".

[Jerry Friedman]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:46:39 PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
...

> And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
> having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
> have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
> some modern affectation.

I agree with everything else you wrote, but not with this. Sailors are the
people who gave the world "fo'c'sle", "bosun", "t'gahns'l" (topgallant sail),
etc.

--
Jerry Friedman

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:18:07?PM UTC-4, bil...@shaw.ca wrote:
> > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:12:20?AM UTC-7, Jerry Friedman wrote:

> > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:38:31?AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
>
> > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > > between AmE and BrE?
> > > I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans was
> > > invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).
> >
> > My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> > pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> > Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> > pronouncing it Boo-wee.
> >
> > I live with it.
>
> Do you know how to pronounce the MD boeye? JJ clearly doesn't but
> prefers to delete the query than to say so.

Huh? Modern Dutch does pronounce those medieval extra e,
-when reading old texts-, for a stage performance for example.

From surviving poetry is is almost certain
that they did the same seven hundred years ago,
for it wouldn't scan otherwise.

I hadn't realised that you would get this worked up
about a triviality,

Jan

[Ross Clark]

Yes, but I consider those the correct pronunciations. "Fore-castle" and
"boat-swain" are spelling pronunciations by landlubbers.

In the case of "buoy", I think given Latin boia, Spanish boya, French
boye, that "=boy" is exactly the form you would expect if the word was
borrowed from French. The sailors have simply inherited that without
material alteration.

Things are complicated by the fact that (it seems) the Dutch word was
also borrowed at about the same time. The Dutch could, I think, account
for the "boo-ee" pronunciation, and for the now-standard spelling. As
for "bwoy", it could be a spelling pronunciation of <buoy>, perhaps
motivated by a distaste for homophony.

[Ross Clark]

Sorry, misquoted from memory. Johnson says "mute", not "silent".

[J. J. Lodder]

Ross Clark <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

> On 23/08/2023 3:20 p.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:

> > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:46:39?PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
> >> having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
> >> have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
> >> some modern affectation.
> >
> > I agree with everything else you wrote, but not with this. Sailors are
> > the people who gave the world "fo'c'sle", "bosun", "t'gahns'l"
> > (topgallant sail), etc.
> >
>
> Yes, but I consider those the correct pronunciations.

It's what you get when you try to make yourself heard,
through a speaking trumpet in a gale.

> "Fore-castle" and boat-swain" are spelling pronunciations by landlubbers.

But the original was by kings and knights, not sailors.
When medieval English kings went to war at sea
they commandeered some merchant ships,
and they ordered temporary wooden 'castles' built on top.
One fore, one after, complete with crenelations.
<https://www.britishbattles.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/4-english-cog.jpg>

In battle you took the castles,
by boarding and throwing the opposition over board,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

Because, like orthoepists generally, he preferred the traditional to the
innovative.

Yu rally ought to do some trimming.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Just like a horse's knee. Did he hang with sailors a lot?

[HVS]

On 21 Aug 2023, Jerry Friedman wrote

> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:38:31 AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
>> The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback
>> a while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also
>> sounds like a different word to the ear.
>>
>> Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables,
>> and
>
>> sounding almost like the American version.
>>
>> Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
>> between AmE and BrE?
>

> I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans
> was invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).

A pleasing example of one of the puns:

In the summer of 1982 I lived for a month or two in a fishing
village, a few doors down from a pub called "The Black Buoy", with a
sign to match the nautical name.

According to local histories, it had originally been "The Black
Boy" - "possibly" after a nickname of Charles II which referred to
his black hair and dark complexion, or (again "possibly") a black
servant or black-coated coach boy.

The name was changed in 1912. It's not clear why -- given the date,
I'd be astounded if it was a PC thing -- but it struck me as clever
use of a homonym.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 5:08:11 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:18:07?PM UTC-4, bil...@shaw.ca wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:12:20?AM UTC-7, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:38:31?AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
> >
> > > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > > > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > > > between AmE and BrE?
> > > > I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans was
> > > > invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).
> > >
> > > My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> > > pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> > > Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> > > pronouncing it Boo-wee.
> > >
> > > I live with it.
> >
> > Do you know how to pronounce the MD boeye? JJ clearly doesn't but
> > prefers to delete the query than to say so.
> Huh? Modern Dutch does pronounce those medieval extra e,
> -when reading old texts-, for a stage performance for example.

MIDDLE DUTCH!!!! And I spelled out the standard abbreviation when
I asked. "Modern Dutch" would be ModD.

> From surviving poetry is is almost certain
> that they did the same seven hundred years ago,
> for it wouldn't scan otherwise.
>
> I hadn't realised that you would get this worked up
> about a triviality,

Some things linguistic are not trivial.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 4:28:49 AM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> On 23/08/2023 3:20 p.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:46:39 PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
> >> having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
> >> have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
> >> some modern affectation.
> >
> > I agree with everything else you wrote, but not with this. Sailors are the
> > people who gave the world "fo'c'sle", "bosun", "t'gahns'l" (topgallant sail),
> > etc.
> >
> Yes, but I consider those the correct pronunciations. "Fore-castle" and
> "boat-swain" are spelling pronunciations by landlubbers.

I consider them the correct pronunciations too, and I was taught (by
/Highlights for Children/, if memory serves) that the one correct pronunciation
of "buoy" was that of "boy". But you said sailors would have carried on a
traditional pronunciation, and I'm saying that far from it, they've drastically
changed the pronunciation of several words.

> In the case of "buoy", I think given Latin boia, Spanish boya, French
> boye, that "=boy" is exactly the form you would expect if the word was
> borrowed from French. The sailors have simply inherited that without
> material alteration.

I tried to find out when French <oy> started to be pronounced with a /w/,
but I failed. I'll take your word that it was after "boye" showed up in English.

> Things are complicated by the fact that (it seems) the Dutch word was
> also borrowed at about the same time. The Dutch could, I think, account
> for the "boo-ee" pronunciation, and for the now-standard spelling. As
> for "bwoy", it could be a spelling pronunciation of <buoy>, perhaps
> motivated by a distaste for homophony.

Speaking of which, M-W gives "buoy" as "ˈbü-ē, ˈbȯi" ("booee, boy") but
"buoyant" as "ˈbȯi-ənt, ˈbü-yənt" ("boyant, booyant"). I'd say my experience
agrees that "booee" and "boyant" are the more common pronunciations
in the U.S. That's consistent with a distaste for homophony.

Another possible story is that "booee" disappeared for a couple centuries
and was revived as a spelling pronunciation and to avoid homophony. That's
one step more complicated, but it explains why we haven't seen any evidence
for a "booee" pronunciation from 1600 to the 20th century. Of course such
evidence might exist. (The only search I tried was for "buoy 'pronounced it'".)
Another argument against that story is that if a spelling pronunciation were
invented out of nothing, we might expect it to start with /bju/ like "Buick",
"bucolic", etc.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Ross Clark]

I'm not questioning the etymology of these words. But they have
undergone sound changes in the centuries since they were formed, in the
community within which they were regularly used and transmitted.
These are perfectly normal sound changes, not the result of special
stupidity or slovenly pronunciation by sailors.

The spelling has not followed the pronunciation, of course. Anyone who
says "fore-castle" or "boat-swain" today has probably learned the word
from a book.

[Ross Clark]

On 24/08/2023 6:46 a.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 4:28:49 AM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
>> On 23/08/2023 3:20 p.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:46:39 PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
>>>> having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
>>>> have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
>>>> some modern affectation.
>>>
>>> I agree with everything else you wrote, but not with this. Sailors are the
>>> people who gave the world "fo'c'sle", "bosun", "t'gahns'l" (topgallant sail),
>>> etc.
>>>
>> Yes, but I consider those the correct pronunciations. "Fore-castle" and
>> "boat-swain" are spelling pronunciations by landlubbers.
>
> I consider them the correct pronunciations too, and I was taught (by
> /Highlights for Children/, if memory serves) that the one correct pronunciation
> of "buoy" was that of "boy". But you said sailors would have carried on a
> traditional pronunciation, and I'm saying that far from it, they've drastically
> changed the pronunciation of several words.

Quite so. My original argument was directed at PTD's apparent suggestion
that "boy" was a peculiar deformation of "boo-ee".

>> In the case of "buoy", I think given Latin boia, Spanish boya, French
>> boye, that "=boy" is exactly the form you would expect if the word was
>> borrowed from French. The sailors have simply inherited that without
>> material alteration.
>
> I tried to find out when French <oy> started to be pronounced with a /w/,
> but I failed. I'll take your word that it was after "boye" showed up in English.

I wouldn't take my word for it. I'd have to look up when the oi > we >
wa shift took place, both in Standard French and any dialects that might
have played a role in nautical borrowings. That certainly could have
been an explanation for "bwoy" and/or <buoy>.

>> Things are complicated by the fact that (it seems) the Dutch word was
>> also borrowed at about the same time. The Dutch could, I think, account
>> for the "boo-ee" pronunciation, and for the now-standard spelling. As
>> for "bwoy", it could be a spelling pronunciation of <buoy>, perhaps
>> motivated by a distaste for homophony.
>
> Speaking of which, M-W gives "buoy" as "ˈbü-ē, ˈbȯi" ("booee, boy") but
> "buoyant" as "ˈbȯi-ənt, ˈbü-yənt" ("boyant, booyant"). I'd say my experience
> agrees that "booee" and "boyant" are the more common pronunciations
> in the U.S. That's consistent with a distaste for homophony.
>
> Another possible story is that "booee" disappeared for a couple centuries
> and was revived as a spelling pronunciation and to avoid homophony. That's
> one step more complicated, but it explains why we haven't seen any evidence
> for a "booee" pronunciation from 1600 to the 20th century. Of course such
> evidence might exist. (The only search I tried was for "buoy 'pronounced it'".)
> Another argument against that story is that if a spelling pronunciation were
> invented out of nothing, we might expect it to start with /bju/ like "Buick",
> "bucolic", etc.

Yes. I looked at the online Wright's Dialect Dictionary but didn't find
anything of interest. Any of these pronunciations could easily have been
hiding out in regional English for a long time.

[Dingbat]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12 PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:
> >
> > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > like a different word to the ear.
> > >
> > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > >
> > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > between AmE and BrE?
> >

> > This will tickle JJ. M-W11C says it's probably from Middle Dutch
> > _boeye_ (clearly two syllables, whatever the vowels may have been).

> What is supposed to be tickling about that?

> It is hardly news that many nautical words in many languages
> derive from Dutch.
>
> In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.

That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?

[J. J. Lodder]

Dingbat <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

If your 'u' is like the U in Uganda, Ukraine, or the 'oo' in boot, yes.
The spoken length in Dutch can be quite variable.
If your 'u' is like the 'u' in but, no,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

It's not "his u." It's standard phonetic notation.

As in "boot." Not as in "Uganda" or "Ukraine," which begin with [j].

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:54:31 PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> On 24/08/2023 6:46 a.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 4:28:49 AM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> >> On 23/08/2023 3:20 p.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:46:39 PM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>>
> >>>> And by 1900 "=boy" is universal among sailors both Br and Am. Sailors
> >>>> having regular need to refer to such things, you would think they would
> >>>> have carried on a traditional pronunciation, rather than succumbed to
> >>>> some modern affectation.
> >>>
> >>> I agree with everything else you wrote, but not with this. Sailors are the
> >>> people who gave the world "fo'c'sle", "bosun", "t'gahns'l" (topgallant sail),
> >>> etc.
> >>>
> >> Yes, but I consider those the correct pronunciations. "Fore-castle" and
> >> "boat-swain" are spelling pronunciations by landlubbers.
> >
> > I consider them the correct pronunciations too, and I was taught (by
> > /Highlights for Children/, if memory serves) that the one correct pronunciation
> > of "buoy" was that of "boy". But you said sailors would have carried on a
> > traditional pronunciation, and I'm saying that far from it, they've drastically
> > changed the pronunciation of several words.

> Quite so. My original argument was directed at PTD's apparent suggestion
> that "boy" was a peculiar deformation of "boo-ee".

OK, I think we agree.

> >> In the case of "buoy", I think given Latin boia, Spanish boya, French
> >> boye, that "=boy" is exactly the form you would expect if the word was
> >> borrowed from French. The sailors have simply inherited that without
> >> material alteration.
> >
> > I tried to find out when French <oy> started to be pronounced with a /w/,
> > but I failed. I'll take your word that it was after "boye" showed up in English.

> I wouldn't take my word for it. I'd have to look up when the oi > we >
> wa shift took place, both in Standard French and any dialects that might
> have played a role in nautical borrowings. That certainly could have
> been an explanation for "bwoy" and/or <buoy>.

Thanks.

> >> Things are complicated by the fact that (it seems) the Dutch word was
> >> also borrowed at about the same time. The Dutch could, I think, account
> >> for the "boo-ee" pronunciation, and for the now-standard spelling. As
> >> for "bwoy", it could be a spelling pronunciation of <buoy>, perhaps
> >> motivated by a distaste for homophony.

...

> > Another possible story is that "booee" disappeared for a couple centuries
> > and was revived as a spelling pronunciation and to avoid homophony. That's
> > one step more complicated, but it explains why we haven't seen any evidence
> > for a "booee" pronunciation from 1600 to the 20th century. Of course such
> > evidence might exist. (The only search I tried was for "buoy 'pronounced it'".)
> > Another argument against that story is that if a spelling pronunciation were
> > invented out of nothing, we might expect it to start with /bju/ like "Buick",
> > "bucolic", etc.

> Yes. I looked at the online Wright's Dialect Dictionary but didn't find
> anything of interest. Any of these pronunciations could easily have been
> hiding out in regional English for a long time.

Well, to clarify and confuse matters,

"Mr. Ellis has shown pretty conclusively that the original English pronunciation
of _oi_ was [Engl.] _ooee_. Our ancestors pronounced boy as an American
pronounces 'buoy,' _booee_. (In regard to this word _buoy_ I had always
supposed our pronunciation a pure Americanism, but Mr. Ellis says it is also
that of all nautical men in England. In ordinary English society the word is
pronounced exactly like _boy_."

[Sic on the lack of quotation marks or italics on the first "boy" and the lack of
a closing parenthesis.]

Charles Astor Bristed, "Some Notes on Ellis's Early English Pronunciation",
_Transactions of the American Philological Association_, 1871

https://books.google.com/books?id=2BU8AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA135

Certainly not what I had in mind.

Ellis did indeed say, "Nautical men constantly call _buoy_ (buui)," and
went on to say more about the word.

https://books.google.com/books?id=6hxiAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA133

--
Jerry Friedman

[J. J. Lodder]

Or he says 'bosun' and fo'c'sle because he learned it from a book.

Beat to quarters!

Jan

[Sam Plusnet]

The whole dollar, or I'm not going to play.

--
Sam Plusnet

[J. J. Lodder]

The bosun's starter will get you started,
on pain of, oh well, pain,

Jan

[bil...@shaw.ca]

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 12:43:05 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> bil...@shaw.ca <bil...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:12:20?AM UTC-7, Jerry Friedman wrote:

> > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:38:31?AM UTC-6, occam wrote:
> > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > >
> > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > > >
> > > > Could this be the explanation for the difference in pronunciation
> > > > between AmE and BrE?

> > > I suspect the two-syllable pronunciation used by many Americans was
> > > invented to distinguish it from "boy" (ruining some puns).
> > >
> > My (Dutch) family name is Boei. One of its meanings is buoy, and it is
> > pronounced in Dutch as one syllable, rhyming with buoy. Oddly enough, in
> > Canadian English, nearly everyone insists in giving it two syllables,
> > pronouncing it Boo-wee.
> >
> > I live with it.

> It is not an unusual name family at all.
> No negative connotations, a 'boei' is a sign
> that shows where it is safe to go,
> and it may be a life saver, as in 'reddingsboei'.
>
I know what it means. The only problem I have with it is convincing English-speaking
Canadians that I know how to spell and pronounce it.

bill

[bil...@shaw.ca]

I don't use that (or any) phonetic spelling system, so I can't say whether
you're right or not.

bill

[Dingbat]

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:56:42 PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> Dingbat wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> > > Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me aback a
> > > > > while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables, but also sounds
> > > > > like a different word to the ear.
> > > > >
> > > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables, and
> > > > > sounding almost like the American version.
> > >

> > > In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
> >
> > That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
> If your 'u' is like the U in Uganda, Ukraine, or the 'oo' in boot, yes.
>

Then, I'm right. Thanks.
FYI, the English pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine are deviant;
they start with [jU]. So, you mean the native and/or the German/
Dutch pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine.

>
> The spoken length in Dutch can be quite variable.
>

It's not always possible to show spoken length in transliteration.
I'd respell Windhoek as <Windhook> the <oo> in which would be
pronounced in English like the [U] in BOOK, not like the [u:] in
BOOT. If Windhook has a vowel like in BOOT, I can think of no
way to reproduce that in an English respelling.

>
> If your 'u' is like the 'u' in but, no,
>

I was writing in ASCII IPA where [u] is never like in BUT.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

You surprise me. Maybe I'm confusing you with another Canadian of Dutch
origin in Vancouver who several years ago recommended using the
International Phonetic Alphabet for representing pronunciation.

> so I can't say whether
> you're right or not.
>
> bill

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

[phil]

Unless you're in parts of Lancashire, where cook, look, hook, etc rhyme
with boot.

[J. J. Lodder]

bil...@shaw.ca <bil...@shaw.ca> wrote:

You must dislike the Dutch pronunciation Boei-uh.
(for the new figuratative word pronunciation)
Perhaps it didn't exist in your time,

Jan

PS For our Anglosaxon friends: there are many different kinds of
tethered floating things.
The 'boei' is the biggest kind of them all.
It comes equipped wit a radar reflector and a (flashing) light,
and they need regular maintenance.
Big enough to be visible in the distance,
even from the bridge of a supertanker.
A smaller one is a 'ton', (English 'barrel')

[J. J. Lodder]

Dingbat <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:56:42?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Dingbat wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me
> > > > > > aback a while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables,
> > > > > > but also sounds like a different word to the ear.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables,
> > > > > > and sounding almost like the American version.
> > > >
> > > > In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
> > >
> > > That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
> > If your 'u' is like the U in Uganda, Ukraine, or the 'oo' in boot, yes.
> >
> Then, I'm right. Thanks.
> FYI, the English pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine are deviant;
> they start with [jU]. So, you mean the native and/or the German/
> Dutch pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine.

I was under the impression that there are no English words
that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
The English words that do start with Oo... are all O-ö....., really.
(afaik)
And the English U... words go to Duth Oe..., like Ukase -> Oekase.
(with the subtle pronunciation difference that you noted)

> > The spoken length in Dutch can be quite variable.
> >
> It's not always possible to show spoken length in transliteration.
> I'd respell Windhoek as <Windhook> the <oo> in which would be
> pronounced in English like the [U] in BOOK, not like the [u:] in
> BOOT. If Windhook has a vowel like in BOOT, I can think of no
> way to reproduce that in an English respelling.

Correct, the South African 'oe' is still Dutch-like.
Conversely, can you guess where 'Zandhoek' could be found?
(if not in Amsterdam)

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

bil...@shaw.ca <bil...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 7:09:34?PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:

I'm like Owl in WthP.
I can read phonetic when I know what it spells,

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> Dingbat <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:56:42?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Dingbat wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:38:31?PM UTC-4, occam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The American pronunciation of 'buoy' (on Star Trek) took me
>>>>>>> aback a while back. The AmE version is not only two syllables,
>>>>>>> but also sounds like a different word to the ear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Today I learned the French for 'buoy': 'bouée'. Two syllables,
>>>>>>> and sounding almost like the American version.
>>>>>
>>>>> In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
>>>>
>>>> That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
>>> If your 'u' is like the U in Uganda, Ukraine, or the 'oo' in boot, yes.
>>>
>> Then, I'm right. Thanks.
>> FYI, the English pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine are deviant;
>> they start with [jU]. So, you mean the native and/or the German/
>> Dutch pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine.
>
> I was under the impression that there are no English words
> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.

I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[charles]

In article <1qg2bc9.ptreae1380aN%nos...@de-ster.demon.nl>, J. J. Lodder

in English the barrel is a 'tun'.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[phil]

Oodles?
(Can you have just one oodle?)

[Ross Clark]

Oy. This is not so much fun any more. A serious mess.

Contra Mr Bristed, I'm pretty sure not all "oi"'s were formerly "ooee"'s.

My contribution to the closing ceremony will be from Jespersen (Modern
English Grammar, Part I).

3.7 /oi/, /o·i/, /ui/, /u·i/, /iui/

Here he lists 38 oy-words for which he finds pronunciation evidence in
one or more of his four 16th-17th century sources (Hart, Mulcaster,
Bullokar, Gill). For about half of them he finds no evidence for
anything but /oi/ (e.g. toy, joy, noise, voice, oil, spoil, avoid,
royal...). For the rest, varying opinions including one or more of the
other pronunciations listed above.

On the one (or two) we have been most concerned with:

boy: /boi, buoi, bue:/
"Oi, in boy, we sound (as the French dooe) woë: for whereas they
write bois, soit, droit; they say bwoes, swoet, drwoet." (Butler,
English Grammar, 1633)

buoy: /buei, bu·i/

Further comment (12.64): "W is sometimes subjoined to the labial
consonants p,b, especially before open o, as in pot, boy, boil, etc.,
which sound as if they were written pwot, bwoy, bwoil, etc. -- but this
is done neither always, nor by all." (Wallis, Grammatica Lingvuae
Anglicanae, 1653, my translation from the Latin)

So there's evidence of a /bwoi/ pronunciation for both boy and buoy.
Good night.

[musika]

On 26/08/2023 10:40, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

Ooze that?

--
Ray
UK

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

charles wrote:

>> PS For our Anglosaxon friends: there are many different kinds of tethered
>> floating things. The 'boei' is the biggest kind of them all. It comes
>> equipped wit a radar reflector and a (flashing) light, and they need
>> regular maintenance. Big enough to be visible in the distance, even from
>> the bridge of a supertanker. A smaller one is a 'ton', (English 'barrel')
>
> in English the barrel is a 'tun'.

Auf Danish: tønde

--
Bertel, Denmark

[J. J. Lodder]

Yes, I know, but afaik 'tun' is not used for small buoy in English.
In Dutch it is. The line of 'buoys' by the edge of the deeper water
is called 'de betonning'.

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

That's far away, but yes, 'oozing' and 'oodles' are good examples.
I should have looked in a dictionary first,
(and known better)

Jan

--
' .... lies a body, oozing blood' (Mac the Knife)

[Peter Moylan]

Should we count Über, the company that tried to drive taxis out of business?

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

[Peter T. Daniels]

Why not? It's not like it's hard to learn a handful of letters and how
to read them.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 7:58:59 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:

> FYI, the English pronunciations of Uganda & Ukraine are deviant;

How are they "deviant"? What's the name of the letter?

Every word in M-W11C that begins with the syllable u- (monoliteral)
begins with [j], with two exceptions (that happen to be adjacent): the
recent borrowing umami and the old borrowing Umayyad. (So do a
few other words, like "use.")

(I did not read all the <un> pages to hunt for gems like "unanimous.")

[Peter T. Daniels]

What does "boot" rhyme with? Is it [bu:t] or bUt]?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 5:17:49 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> A smaller one is a 'ton', (English 'barrel')

A tun is a large cask.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:05:08 AM UTC-6, Ross Clark wrote:
> On 25/08/2023 2:35 a.m., Jerry Friedman wrote:

...

> > Well, to clarify and confuse matters,
> >
> > "Mr. Ellis has shown pretty conclusively that the original English pronunciation
> > of _oi_ was [Engl.] _ooee_. Our ancestors pronounced boy as an American
> > pronounces 'buoy,' _booee_. (In regard to this word _buoy_ I had always
> > supposed our pronunciation a pure Americanism, but Mr. Ellis says it is also
> > that of all nautical men in England. In ordinary English society the word is
> > pronounced exactly like _boy_."
> >
> > [Sic on the lack of quotation marks or italics on the first "boy" and the lack of
> > a closing parenthesis.]
> >
> > Charles Astor Bristed, "Some Notes on Ellis's Early English Pronunciation",
> > _Transactions of the American Philological Association_, 1871
> >
> > https://books.google.com/books?id=2BU8AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA135
> >
> > Certainly not what I had in mind.
> >
> > Ellis did indeed say, "Nautical men constantly call _buoy_ (buui)," and
> > went on to say more about the word.
> >
> > https://books.google.com/books?id=6hxiAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA133
> >
> Oy. This is not so much fun any more. A serious mess.
>
> Contra Mr Bristed, I'm pretty sure not all "oi"'s were formerly "ooee"'s.

I was thinking on similar lines.

> My contribution to the closing ceremony will be from Jespersen (Modern
> English Grammar, Part I).
>
> 3.7 /oi/, /o·i/, /ui/, /u·i/, /iui/
>
> Here he lists 38 oy-words for which he finds pronunciation evidence in
> one or more of his four 16th-17th century sources (Hart, Mulcaster,
> Bullokar, Gill). For about half of them he finds no evidence for
> anything but /oi/ (e.g. toy, joy, noise, voice, oil, spoil, avoid,
> royal...). For the rest, varying opinions including one or more of the
> other pronunciations listed above.
>
> On the one (or two) we have been most concerned with:
>
> boy: /boi, buoi, bue:/
> "Oi, in boy, we sound (as the French dooe) woë: for whereas they
> write bois, soit, droit; they say bwoes, swoet, drwoet." (Butler,
> English Grammar, 1633)
>
> buoy: /buei, bu·i/
>
> Further comment (12.64): "W is sometimes subjoined to the labial
> consonants p,b, especially before open o, as in pot, boy, boil, etc.,
> which sound as if they were written pwot, bwoy, bwoil, etc. -- but this
> is done neither always, nor by all." (Wallis, Grammatica Lingvuae
> Anglicanae, 1653, my translation from the Latin)
>
> So there's evidence of a /bwoi/ pronunciation for both boy and buoy.
> Good night.

Thanks, it is now clear that "buoy" and "boy" have always or never been
pronounced by various people with various forward-gliding vowels, as
a result of which the modern pronunciations of "buoy" are what they
are.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

After posting I remembered a perfectly good everyday example: ooze.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Sorry. Preplagiarized again.

[phil]

Yes, sorry, sloppiness on my part. They don't rhyme properly anyway.
What I should have said is that in some parts of Lancashire cook, look,
hook, etc have the [u:] as in boot.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

That's what the rest of us understood.

[Phil Carmody]

My 'umami' fits the bill. 'Ooze' too.
Oops!

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2023-08-26 17:31:09 +0000, Phil Carmody said:

> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
>>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
>>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
>>
>> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
>> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
>
> My 'umami' fits the bill. 'Ooze' too.

I don't say umami very often. Indeed I'm not sure I've ever said it out
loud, but if I did I'd agree with you.


> Oops!
>
> Phil


--
athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016

[J. J. Lodder]

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-08-26 10:23:31 +0000, musika said:
>
> > On 26/08/2023 10:40, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> >>
> >>> Dingbat <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
> >>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
> >>
> >> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
> >> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
> >>
> > Ooze that?
>
> Sorry. Preplagiarized again.

Have an Ouzo. It has the same opening sound
as oozing, in my pronunciation,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:00:06?PM UTC-4, bil...@shaw.ca wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 7:09:34?PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:

> > > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
> > > > In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
> > > That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
> >
> > I don't use that (or any) phonetic spelling system, so I can't say whether
> > you're right or not.
>
> Why not? It's not like it's hard to learn a handful of letters and how
> to read them.

Clueless, as usual.
Is it really impossible for you to understand
that other people's brains may work in different ways?

Jan

[bil...@shaw.ca]

I don't think it did.My family moved to Canada in 1959,
and I spent the last few months of my Grade 5 year at the back of
a classroom in Nelson, B.C., with a Grade 1 reader on my desk.

bill

[Peter T. Daniels]

Only because you know what a parts-of-Lancashire accent sounds like.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Not about learning how to pronounce letters.

Every one of them managed to do it when they were five years old
or younger.

[Silvano]

> Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:00:06?PM UTC-4, bil...@shaw.ca wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 7:09:34?PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>
>>>>> In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
>>>> That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
>>>
>>> I don't use that (or any) phonetic spelling system, so I can't say whether
>>> you're right or not.
>>
>> Why not? It's not like it's hard to learn a handful of letters and how
>> to read them.

Hahahahahaha! It's not like it's hard to understand that people with
different native languages read a handful of letters more often that not
in different ways.

Sch in Scheveningen (as pronounced by J.J. Lodder)
sch in schiavo (as pronounced by me)
Sch in Schauspieler (as pronounced by a native German)

[Peter Moylan]

On 27/08/23 03:31, Phil Carmody wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

>>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
>>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
>>
>> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
>> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
>
> My 'umami' fits the bill. 'Ooze' too.
> Oops!

My "oops" has a different vowel.

[Peter Moylan]

I'm very used to Kirshenbaum IPA, but one thing I can never get right is
the difference between /u/ and /U/. That is, I know what the difference
is, but I never know which is which.

[lar3ryca]

oops.. ooh! Also oozy, but that one's way out there; in the Oort colud.

--
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.

[Dingbat]

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:09:45 AM UTC+5:30, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2023-08-26 09:17, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> > On 2023-08-26 09:46:55 +0000, phil said:
> >> On 26/08/2023 10:40, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >>> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> >>>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
> >>>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
> >>>
> >>> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
> >>> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
> >>>

Tamil name: Udagaimandalam, English name: Ootacamund.
Short Tamil name: Udagai, Short English name: Ooty
The Tamil name is its original name before the British loused it up.
It's now called Ooty or less commonly Udagai, in Tamil.

> >>
> >> Oodles?
> >> (Can you have just one oodle?)
>

An oodle is the offspring of a poodle bred with another breed of dog:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/oodle

> >
> > After posting I remembered a perfectly good everyday example: ooze.
> oops.. ooh! Also oozy, but that one's way out there; in the Oort colud.
>

> I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
>

You'd end up saying, "Gosh, I'm gauche."

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Well, it's true that I spent about ten years of my childhood living in
Greater Manchester, but it's not that. Any normal educated person with
some capacity to understand English can immediately deduce what is
meant on rqding something that isn't quite right.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Not to mention

sch in school (as pronounced by me, in which sch may represent the same
sound as in your schiavo, but my Italian isn't good enough for me to be
certain).

[Peter Moylan]

Not quite. In English, the [k] in "school" is further back in the throat
than the [k] in "ski", although most of us don't notice the difference
most of the time. I don't have much Italian either, but I think
"schiavo" starts the same way as "ski".

(But I agree that the other examples given my Silvano don't even contain
a k-sound.)

[J. J. Lodder]

Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:

> > Peter T. Daniels <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:00:06?PM UTC-4, bil...@shaw.ca wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 7:09:34?PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:24:12?PM UTC+5:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> In modern Dutch it has become just 'boei', one syllable.
> >>>> That looks like [buj] or [bu:j]. Am I right?
> >>>
> >>> I don't use that (or any) phonetic spelling system, so I can't say whether
> >>> you're right or not.
> >>
> >> Why not? It's not like it's hard to learn a handful of letters and how
> >> to read them.
>
>
> Hahahahahaha! It's not like it's hard to understand that people with
> different native languages read a handful of letters more often that not
> in different ways.
>
> Sch in Scheveningen (as pronounced by J.J. Lodder)

That will depend on which language I try to speak.
(with the word embedded in a sentence in it)
It seems to be impossible to make people understand
that there is no such thing as -the- Dutch pronunciation
of that sch... sound.
Most native speakers of Dutch don't have that harsh gutteral
pronunciation that is supposed to be it,
some are even incapable of doing it like that.

> sch in schiavo (as pronounced by me)
> Sch in Schauspieler (as pronounced by a native German)

Again, there is no such thing as -the- native German pronunciation.

As for the supposed 'Scheveningen' test:
afaik there is no evidence that it was ever applied
to real German soldiers during the failed invasion on May 10, 1940.

It was (perhaps) used for self-reassurance by Dutch troops.
In the early hours of the invasion there were rumours that
German troops operated in false Dutch army or police uniforms,
So it happened that some of the Dutch were shooting at each other.
All this was soon sorted out, the Dutch got organised, [1]
and the Battle of The Hague ended in a painful German defeat.

Jan

[1] The surprise and disorganisation isn't too surprising.
The Dutch faced the first major airborne military operation of all time.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 26/08/23 21:47, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
>
> >>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
> >>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
> >>
> >> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
> >> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
> >

> > That's far away, but yes, 'oozing' and 'oodles' are good examples.
> > I should have looked in a dictionary first,
> > (and known better)
>
> Should we count Über, the company that tried to drive taxis out of business?

Not for me.
It would have the Dutch UU sound, -IF- it was spelled as Über.
However, it isn't, it is Uber, without the umlaut.

when spelled 'Uber' the usual Dutch pronunciation
would still be with the U sound. (like 'Uren' for example)

But the Dutch do not recognise it as such,
and take it as a foreign word.
The usual Dutch Dutch pronunciation will be 'oe'-like, I guess,
like they pronouce German 'Uber'. (without the umlaut)

Forvo leads me to believe that Americans do put on the umlaut,
while pronouncing it as if it isn't there.

Others will know better,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 27/08/23 03:31, Phil Carmody wrote:
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On 2023-08-26 09:17:45 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
>
> >>> I was under the impression that there are no English words
> >>> that start with a true ish Engl'oo' (so Dutch 'oe') sound.
> >>
> >> I haven't managed to think of one (yet), but if you accept Ooty, the
> >> English name of Ootacamund, as a word, then it's an example.
> >
> > My 'umami' fits the bill. 'Ooze' too.
> > Oops!
>
> My "oops" has a different vowel.

Dutch 'oeps' has a very short 'oe' sound.
And FYA, the Dutch 'oe' sound is associated
with things that are stupid or ridiculous.

An 'Oen' is an extremely stupid person.
The mock names taken by places during 'carnaval'
like 'Oeteldonk' have more than the expected share of the oe,

Jan

[Silvano]

Peter Moylan hat am 27.08.2023 um 09:49 geschrieben:

Perhaps. I should listen to you saying "ski" and "school", but probably
I wouldn't notice the difference between them and/or to my "schiavo".

[Silvano]

J. J. Lodder hat am 27.08.2023 um 09:55 geschrieben:

> Silvano <Sil...@noncisonopernessuno.it> wrote:
>> Sch in Scheveningen (as pronounced by J.J. Lodder)
>
> That will depend on which language I try to speak.
> (with the word embedded in a sentence in it)
> It seems to be impossible to make people understand
> that there is no such thing as -the- Dutch pronunciation
> of that sch... sound.
> Most native speakers of Dutch don't have that harsh gutteral
> pronunciation that is supposed to be it,
> some are even incapable of doing it like that.

How do they pronounce Scheveningen?

>> sch in schiavo (as pronounced by me)
>> Sch in Schauspieler (as pronounced by a native German)
>
> Again, there is no such thing as -the- native German pronunciation.

In general terms you're right, but I can't imagine a native German
saying Schauspieler with an initial sk.