Nowadays, the younger generation (under 30) seem to pronounce "look"
as "luck", "cook" as "cuck" and particularly "book" as "buck".
Cany anyone tell me when and why this change took place or have I been
pronouncing these words wrongly all my life?
--
Alasdair.
Living languages evolve that's all.
>
>I notice that younger speakers on British TV and radio tend to
>pronounce "oo" as a short "u", these days. In my distant Scottish
>youth, we were taught to pronounce "oo" to rhyme with "boo", "roof" or
>"root". The same principle applied to words like "look", "cook" and
>"book"
>
>Nowadays, the younger generation (under 30) seem to pronounce "look"
>as "luck", "cook" as "cuck" and particularly "book" as "buck".
>
It's worse than that. Some pronounce the oo/u with a slightly strangled
vowel that is heading towards "i" as in lick, kick and bick.
>Cany anyone tell me when and why this change took place or have I been
>pronouncing these words wrongly all my life?
Your pronunciation is spot on for you. The fact that the pronunciation
by others has wandered off into alien territory is no reason for you, or
me, to change.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
I've always put that as a Scottish/Southern English distinction. My
native accent (being from not-that-far-from-Liverpool) has a very strong
"oo" sound in words like "book", and for 40 years or so I've been aware
that those soft southern Jessies pronounce it more like "buck".
Frankly, it's a good job there isn't a word spelt "fook" (though
strangely, in a form of eye dialect, that's how they spell our
pronunciation of the 'u' variant).
--
Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu
Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk
> I notice that younger speakers on British TV and radio tend to
> pronounce "oo" as a short "u", these days. In my distant Scottish
> youth, we were taught to pronounce "oo" to rhyme with "boo", "roof" or
> "root". The same principle applied to words like "look", "cook" and
> "book"
I say "boo" with a long "oo" (/u:/), at least as a noun or verb, because
the vowel comes at the end of the word. The others all have a short "oo"
(/u/). But "rooves" has a long "oo" because the vowel is followed by /v/.
Likewise, "booze" has a long "oo". It's the same quality of vowel, just a
difference in length depending on the (linguistic) environment.
> Nowadays, the younger generation (under 30) seem to pronounce "look"
> as "luck", "cook" as "cuck" and particularly "book" as "buck".
"Look" is pronounced similarly to "luck" in some Scottish varieties. I
don't think it's peculiar to the younger generation. You hear it from
older speakers.
I haven't noticed the other words being pronounced like that, but they
might have reduced vowels if they're not stressed, which might make "book"
sound more like "buck".
--
John
>> I notice that younger speakers on British TV and radio tend to
>> pronounce "oo" as a short "u", these days. In my distant Scottish
>> youth, we were taught to pronounce "oo" to rhyme with "boo", "roof" or
>> "root". The same principle applied to words like "look", "cook" and
>> "book"
>>
>> Nowadays, the younger generation (under 30) seem to pronounce "look"
>> as "luck", "cook" as "cuck" and particularly "book" as "buck".
>>
>> Cany anyone tell me when and why this change took place or have I been
>> pronouncing these words wrongly all my life?
>
>I've always put that as a Scottish/Southern English distinction. My
>native accent (being from not-that-far-from-Liverpool) has a very strong
>"oo" sound in words like "book", and for 40 years or so I've been aware
>that those soft southern Jessies pronounce it more like "buck".
>Frankly, it's a good job there isn't a word spelt "fook" (though
>strangely, in a form of eye dialect, that's how they spell our
>pronunciation of the 'u' variant).
Is this the same as the book-is-berk pronunciation? If so, now is the
perfect time for Archie Valparaiso to follow Areff's lead and come in
from the cold. AV was the first to comment here on the book-is-berk
pronunciation (and the related tube-is-cheeb). He would agree with
Alasdair that its adoption has far more to do with age than region or
even class. Thirtysomethings and younger from all over Britain say
'berk' when they mean 'book' - and I wouldn't have it any other way.
Every time someone on the radio talks about 'berks', I get to shout
'berk!', which I enjoy immensely.
Mariella Frostrup, the presenter of Radio 4's 'Open Berk', used to say
'berk' but - perhaps because she is now of a respectable age - these
days her pronunciation is impeccable. Some of her guests do still
provide shouting opportunities, though. There was one in the summer who
kept talking about how many 'berks' he sold in 'bookshops' (the standard
'oo' vowel for his accent, whatever it was), which was a bit odd. I took
this as proof that the book-is-berk pronunciation is, for some people, a
deliberately adopted fashion statement rather than a natural vowel shift
- else why not 'berkshop' too?
--
VB
>Is this the same as the book-is-berk pronunciation?
Essentially, yes. However, it is "berk" with a South of England accent
where the "r" in "berk" is suppressed.
--
Alasdair.
That doesn't explain why only the British are adopting this weird sound
shift.
--
Rob Bannister
Perhaps it's not only the British. I certainly wouldn't pronounce
"look", "cook", and "book" as _my_ versions of "luck", "cuck", and
"buck", but I think it very likely that my pronunciations of the first
three are similar to Alasdair's pronunciations of the last three. The
sound shift isn't happening in time, it's something that happens as you
travel between the north and south of England.
Mind you, I think there's a different sound shift happening. I've heard
some English people (probably from the south) pronouncing those three
words with a schwa.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
We British are innovators, inventors, trend-setters and eccentric.
>English people (probably from the south) pronouncing those three
>words with a schwa.
Please, what is a schwa? I'm an agnostic in such matters.
--
Alasdair.
A very nondescript vowel, almost always occurring in an unstressed
syllable. You can hear it, in most varieties of English, in the second
syllable of "positive" or "negative". A sort of grunt. The indefinite
article "a" is often pronounced as a schwa, especially if it's
unstressed (as it usually is).
That was an interesting use of the word "agnostic".
>Alasdair wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:14:06 +1100, Peter Moylan
>> <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> English people (probably from the south) pronouncing those three
>>> words with a schwa.
>>
>> Please, what is a schwa? I'm an agnostic in such matters.
>
>A very nondescript vowel, almost always occurring in an unstressed
>syllable. You can hear it, in most varieties of English, in the second
>syllable of "positive" or "negative". A sort of grunt. The indefinite
>article "a" is often pronounced as a schwa, especially if it's
>unstressed (as it usually is).
>
Yes. The OED says:
The central vowel sound ..., typically occurring in weakly
stressed syllables, as in the final syllable of 'sofa' and the first
syllable of 'along'.
The schwa sound is sometimes represented informally as "uh". For
example, the definite article "the" has two different pronunciations
"thee" and thuh". The second has the schwa, indistinct, vowel sound.
>That was an interesting use of the word "agnostic".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
It doesn't seem like a north-south thing (subtle variations excepted).
People don't feel so much obliged to use formal speech in public these
days. This is quite a good thing, but leads to problems like that of the
R4 science presenter, Quentin Cooper, who the other week said "jew, and
by that I do mean 'd-e-w', jew...". (But he's the one who sniffles all
the time, which is worse.)
>>
>> Please, what is a schwa? I'm an agnostic in such matters.
>
> A very nondescript vowel, almost always occurring in an unstressed
> syllable. You can hear it, in most varieties of English, in the second
> syllable of "positive" or "negative". A sort of grunt. The indefinite
> article "a" is often pronounced as a schwa, especially if it's
> unstressed (as it usually is).
>
> That was an interesting use of the word "agnostic".
Perhaps it should have been "ignostic" (this is not intended
disrespectfully, Alasdair).
--
Mike.