"rhoticism": Misspelling?
Bob Cunningham
The spelling "rhoticism" that we sometimes see in AUE postings raises a
couple of foods for thought:
1. It doesn't appear in major dictionaries.
2. The word "rhotacism", which *is* found in dictionaries and
which sounds about the same as "rhoticism" would be pronounced,
doesn't necessarily mean what posters probably intend it to mean. That
is, it has a meaning in philology that doesn't pertain to the
pronunciation of "r" where some dialects would omit it, but to the
*substitution* of another sound for an "r" sound*.
It seems to me that there's room for acceptance of "rhoticism" as a word
that pertains only to presence versus absence of "r" sounds. In fact, it
could be argued that no justification is necessary for a form that
consists of the addition of the productive suffix "-ism" to an existing
word.
However, it may be unnecessary to add that spelling to the language, since
"rhoticity" seems to do the job well enough. I don't find "rhoticity" in
major dictionaries, but Burchfield, in his _New Fowler's Modern English
Usage_, refers to it in his definition of "rhotic":
Of a form of English, especially Scots and American English,
that retains historical /r/ in medial and final position
(Arthur, for fear, harder). The state or condition of being
rhotic is _rhoticity_ or _rhotacism_. Received Pronunciation
(in British English) is notable for its lack of rhoticity,
i.e. is a non-rhotic form of English.
I don't know of any source that gives the older definition of "rhotacism"
for "rhoticity".
* Definitions of "rhotacism" from _The New Shorter Oxford English
Dictionary_:
rhotacism /"r<schwa>Ut<schwa>sIz(<schwa>)m/ n. M19.
[mod.L rhotacismus ult. f. Gk rhotakizein make excessive or
wrong use of the letter r, f. as RHO + -izein -IZE w.
hiatus-filling k: see -ISM.]
1 Ling. Excessive use or distinctive pronunciation of the
phoneme /r/ (repr. by the letter r); spec. use of the burr
or uvular r. M19.
2 Philol. Conversion of another sound, esp. the phoneme
/s/ (repr. by the letter s), into the phoneme /r/ (repr.
by the letter r). M19.
Gary Vellenzer
exw...@earthlink.net says...
that pronounce postvocalic "r". "Rhoticism" is derived from that.
You can't necessarily expect to find technical jargon in dictionaries.
Gary
Raymond S. Wise
news:MPG.17eba30b9...@news.easynews.com...
"Rhotacism" and "rhoticism" would be pronounced exactly the same by most
people, which would be reason enough to me to avoid the term "rhoticism."
Another term which I think would best be avoided is "r-ful," "r-full," as in
the following:
From *The Oxford Companion to the English Language* by Tom McArthur, at
http://www.xrefer.com/entry/443664
[quote]
Rhotic And Non-Rhotic
[...]
In one set of accents of English, _r_ is pronounced wherever it is
orthographically present: _red, barrel, beer, beard, worker._ Such a variety
is variously known as _rhotic, r-pronouncing, or r-ful(l)._
[end quote]
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Bob Cunningham
<illinoi...@mninter.net> said:
> "Gary Vellenzer" <gvell...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.17eba30b9...@news.easynews.com...
[ . . . ]
> > The word "rhotic" is used in linguistic to characterise English
> > dialects that pronounce postvocalic "r".
Yes, of course, that's well known.
> > "Rhoticism" is derived from that.
But the question is: Should it have been derived with that
spelling when "rhotacism" already existed with the same
meaning?
> > You can't necessarily expect to find technical jargon in
> > dictionaries.
_The New Shorter Oxford_ has pretty good coverage of technical
terms, and more to the point, it has "rhotacism".
> "Rhotacism" and "rhoticism" would be pronounced exactly the
> same by most people, which would be reason enough to me to
> avoid the term "rhoticism." Another term which I think
> would best be avoided is "r-ful," "r-full," as in the
> following:
> From *The Oxford Companion to the English Language* by Tom
> McArthur, at http://www.xrefer.com/entry/443664
> [quote]
> Rhotic And Non-Rhotic
> [...]
> In one set of accents of English, _r_ is pronounced wherever
> it is orthographically present: _red, barrel, beer, beard,
> worker._ Such a variety is variously known as _rhotic,
> r-pronouncing, or r-ful(l)._
> [end quote]
This is the first case I've seen of humor in Tom McArthur's
book. Anyway, I hope it's intended to be humor. He seems
to be slyly deriding rhotic pronunciation, suggesting that
it's awful, spelled "r-ful".
I see now that "r-ful" is a fairly well-known joke. Google
gives 499 hits.
As one example, at
<http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/messeas/handouts/dialect/node6.html>
there is
Note that Lower Middle Class speakers (LMC) cross over all
classes above them and use the most r-ful speech in the
most careful style.
Ben Zimmer
The term "r-ful" is not meant to be a joke, though it does lend itself
to jokes among sociolinguists (for instance, I see there's a paper title
called "The (r)-ful Truth about African Nova Scotian English"). The
term has been in common use by William Labov and other linguists since
at least the '60s, (around the same time that "rhotic" and "non-rhotic"
began appearing in the literature). It's a companion term for "r-less",
which has a longer pedigree -- OED dates it to 1902 and cites a 1941
_Language_ article with the following:
"This occurs frequently in the mixed dialect of those who have both
‘r-pronouncing’ and ‘r-less’ forms in their speech."
Labov helped popularize "r-ful" with the publication of _The Social
Stratification of English in New York City_ (1966). A quote from it
appears in a follow-up piece, "The Social Stratification of (r) in New
York City Department Stores" (in _Sociolinguistic Patterns_, 1972):
"The shift from the influence of the New England prestige pattern
(r-less) to the Midwestern prestige pattern (r-ful) is felt most
completely at Saks. The younger people at Saks are under the influence
of the r-pronouncing pattern, and the older ones are not."
The term "r-ful" is certainly less cumbersome than "r-pronouncing", but
it does provoke smirks, especially from non-rhotic speakers.
--Ben
Aaron J. Dinkin
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:30:05 -0500, "Raymond S. Wise"
><illinoi...@mninter.net> said:
>
>> "Gary Vellenzer" <gvell...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.17eba30b9...@news.easynews.com...
>>
>> > The word "rhotic" is used in linguistic to characterise English
>> > dialects that pronounce postvocalic "r".
>
> Yes, of course, that's well known.
>
>> > "Rhoticism" is derived from that.
>
> But the question is: Should it have been derived with that
> spelling when "rhotacism" already existed with the same
> meaning?
I don't think "rhotacism" has the same meaning. The definition you cited
of "rhotacism" referred to "excessive pronunciation" of /r/, but I don't
think that that would refer to the ordinary usage of /r/ in rhotic
dialects. I would think that it would refer more to pronunciations like
"Warshington". The other definitions of "rhotacism" apply even less -
"distinctive pronunciation" of /r/, or the substitution of /r/ for another
sound (as the /s/ -> /r/ shift in Latin "tempus"/"temporis").
That said, however, I agree that "rhoticism" is probably not a very good
word to use as a noun based on "rhotic", since the potential for confusion
with "rhotacism" is so great. For whatever it's worth, the Google ratio of
"rhoticity" to "rhoticism" is about 8:1.
Is there an adjective for "rhotacism"? It couldn't possibly be "rhotac",
of course - maybe "rhotacistic"?
<snip>
> This is the first case I've seen of humor in Tom McArthur's
> book. Anyway, I hope it's intended to be humor. He seems
> to be slyly deriding rhotic pronunciation, suggesting that
> it's awful, spelled "r-ful".
I don't think this is intended to be a joke. "R-ful" and "awful" would be
quite distinct in almost all non-rhotic dialects, I believe.
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Pat Durkin
"Ben Zimmer" <bgzi...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:3D826DAB...@midway.uchicago.edu...
>
>
> The term "r-ful" is not meant to be a joke, though it does lend itself
> to jokes among sociolinguists (for instance, I see there's a paper
title
> called "The (r)-ful Truth about African Nova Scotian English"). The
> term has been in common use by William Labov and other linguists since
> at least the '60s, (around the same time that "rhotic" and
"non-rhotic"
> began appearing in the literature). It's a companion term for
"r-less",
> which has a longer pedigree -- OED dates it to 1902 and cites a 1941
> _Language_ article with the following:
>
> "This occurs frequently in the mixed dialect of those who have both
> 'r-pronouncing' and 'r-less' forms in their speech."
>
> Labov helped popularize "r-ful" with the publication of _The Social
> Stratification of English in New York City_ (1966). A quote from it
> appears in a follow-up piece, "The Social Stratification of (r) in New
> York City Department Stores" (in _Sociolinguistic Patterns_, 1972):
>
> "The shift from the influence of the New England prestige pattern
> (r-less) to the Midwestern prestige pattern (r-ful) is felt most
> completely at Saks. The younger people at Saks are under the
influence
> of the r-pronouncing pattern, and the older ones are not."
Omigod! Prestige associated with Midwestern?
Ben Zimmer
"Aaron J. Dinkin" wrote:
>
> Is there an adjective for "rhotacism"? It couldn't possibly be "rhotac",
> of course - maybe "rhotacistic"?
Yes, that would be it. It's listed in Webster's New International 2nd
edition, but not in the OED (though it does have "pre-rhotacistic"
meaning "previous to the tendency to rhotacism"). NI2 and OED also have
"itacistic" (characterized by itacism, i.e., pronouncing the Greek vowel
"eta" as [i:] instead of [e:]). None of the other similar terms
(betacism, etacism, iotacism, lambdacism, zetacism) have adjective forms
listed.
And here's a useful word that has nothing to do with Greek letters:
------------
psittacism
[ad. F. psittacisme (Leibnitz Nouveaux Essais sur l'entendement humain
(1765) II. 145) or G. psittazismus, f. Gr. parrot: see -ISM.]
The mechanical repetition of previously received ideas or images that
reflects neither true reasoning nor feeling; repetition of words or
phrases parrot-fashion, without reflection, automatically. Hence
psittacist; psittacistically adv.
------------
Ben Zimmer
The r-ful prestige pattern has more accurately been called "General
American", incorporating the Inland North, the Midland, and the West
(not to mention Canada).
Richard Fontana
Not to mention Western New England (which might be considered part of the
Inland North, but Labov should have said 'Eastern New England').
As I've noted before, some of the accents I hear in Western Connecticut
are chillingly close to Chicago (Sipowiczic, of course) and Michigan
(Greater Detroit). This seems to be particularly true of speakers from
the Danbury and Waterbury regions.
Martin Ambuhl
>
> However, it may be unnecessary to add that spelling to the language, since
> "rhoticity" seems to do the job well enough. I don't find "rhoticity" in
> major dictionaries, but Burchfield, in his _New Fowler's Modern English
> Usage_, refers to it in his definition of "rhotic":
I have, however, found in an a number of dictionaries, both major and
minor. It usually appears as a derivational entry, rather than as a
headword. Perhaps your expectations of its importance are a bit too
much.
Bob Cunningham
said:
With CD-ROM dictionaries, you search for a word and find it whether it's a
derivational mention or a main entry. For example, a search in _NSOED_
finds "satisfactorily" under the main entry "satisfactory". It finds no
"rhoticity". It has "rhotacism" as a main entry.
My _W3NID_ on CD-ROM finds no "rhoticity", but here allowance needs to be
made for the publication date of that dictionary, which was in the late
1960s, about the same time "rhotic" is first attested in the online _OED_.
There have been recent updates to the CD-ROM _W3NID_, but the updating has
been far from thorough.
When you search for "rhoticism" at Xrefer you get no hits, but when you
search for "rhoticity" it gives it (and also "rhotacism") to you as a
mention in the main entry "rhotic" in Burchfield's _New Fowler's Modern
English Usage_.
It seems that "rhoticism" is on shaky ground, but it will probably be
firmly established in the language before too long. "Rhoticity" seems to
be well established.
(Dictionary abbreviations are explained at
http://www.alt-usage-english.org/intro_a.shtml#Dictio0004 .)
Bob Cunningham
said:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 21:08:03 GMT, Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:30:05 -0500, "Raymond S. Wise"
> ><illinoi...@mninter.net> said:
> >> "Gary Vellenzer" <gvell...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.17eba30b9...@news.easynews.com...
> >> > The word "rhotic" is used in linguistic to characterise English
> >> > dialects that pronounce postvocalic "r".
> > Yes, of course, that's well known.
> >> > "Rhoticism" is derived from that.
> > But the question is: Should it have been derived with that
> > spelling when "rhotacism" already existed with the same
> > meaning?
> I don't think "rhotacism" has the same meaning. The definition
> you cited of "rhotacism" referred to "excessive pronunciation"
> of /r/, but I don't think that that would refer to the ordinary
> usage of /r/ in rhotic dialects.
I agree. I was thinking more of the later part of the definition, where
it referred to "the burr or uvular r", but I see now that I was mistaken
in assuming that that covered the use of intervocalic "r".
> I would think that it would refer more to pronunciations like
> "Warshington". The other definitions of "rhotacism" apply even less -
> "distinctive pronunciation" of /r/, or the substitution of /r/ for another
> sound (as the /s/ -> /r/ shift in Latin "tempus"/"temporis").
> That said, however, I agree that "rhoticism" is probably not a very good
> word to use as a noun based on "rhotic", since the potential for confusion
> with "rhotacism" is so great. For whatever it's worth, the Google ratio of
> "rhoticity" to "rhoticism" is about 8:1.
It's an interesting situation. It's possible that most people who use the
word "rhoticism" don't even know about "rhotacism".
GrapeApe
is not a written R? Such as Chicago being pronounced Chicargo?
Even some accents generally considered non-rhotic will often regularly sound an
R where there is none. I think British RP does this, placing an R inside words
where it may not exist, yet not using it on the final r of a word.
Aaron J. Dinkin
> Is there a word for the type of rhoticism which places an r sound where
> there is not a written R? Such as Chicago being pronounced Chicargo?
This might be an example of rhotacism (the kind with an <a>); I'm not
sure.
> Even some accents generally considered non-rhotic will often regularly
> sound an R where there is none. I think British RP does this, placing
> an R inside words where it may not exist, yet not using it on the final
> r of a word.
Are you thinking of words like "draw[r]ing"? This is called "intrusive r",
and it also happens across word boundaries: "the idea[r] of it". As far as
I know, it's impossible in RP to have a [r] before a consonant, though.
GrapeApe
>
>> there is not a written R? Such as Chicago being pronounced Chicargo?
>
>sure.
So can we say:
Nonrhoticism: Beeya
Rhoticism: Beer
Rhotacism: I'm from Chicargo.
That is, rhotacism is only the use of an r sound in situations it should not
exist according to the written word for a rhotic speaker? It seems rather
similar to the idear of the intrusive r.
Aaron J. Dinkin
I believe that one of the definitions of "rhotacism" is something like
'excessive use of /r/'. What counts as "excessive", though, probably
varies from person to person.
Ben Zimmer
I don't think current linguists would refer to the "warsh" phenomenon
as "rhotacism"-- I've seen it called "epenthetic r", e.g.:
http://www.bartleby.com/61/5d.html
http://www.indiana.edu/~srlweb/Clopper-43.pdf
Don't have any sources handy, but I recall reading a theory that the
epenthetic r spread in the South Midland region due to a kind of
hypercorrection when the prestige pattern changed from non-rhotic to
rhotic. The previously prestigious Southern non-rhotic pattern had
"war" as [wO:], but when that pattern lost prestige in the South
Midlands, the rhotic pronunciation of [wOr] took over. In the
process, some speakers hypercorrected other forms, thus pronouncing
"wash" as [wOrS] (or [wA.rS]?) with an epenthetic r.
--Ben
Mike Lyle
and others provided an interesting discussion, and couple of matters
arise, though I'm in the middle of a job, and have no time to be sure
of doing them justice.
I don't know about Labov, but Tom McArthur certainly writes with quiet
humour. After all, the only workable rule is that if an experienced
writer makes you smile or weep, he probably means to. (I except such
tragic cases as that of the death of Little Nell, which I gather was
not in fact intended by the author to make us fall about laughing.)
The only source I myself have for this word *rhotakizo* is "Suidas"
(as late as my early Lempriere people thought this was somebody's
name, a view treated with something like contempt by OCD). "The Suidas
Dictionary" has to be used with more expert caution than I can offer,
as it's extremely late and not reliable. Perhaps the word was
standard; perhaps the editor coined the term himself -- I have no
context; perhaps it was jocular (the Greeks did that, too); perhaps it
was even a spelling mistake. I'm not equipped to judge; and on the
past performance of even our greatest English dictionaries I'm
inclined to be wary.
Shades of meaning apart, my inexpert ear makes me want the "rhoticist"
forms rather than the "rhotacist" ones. A direct analogy with
*iotakismos* is at best uncertain, as *iota* ends with an *a*; the
corresponding verb in L&S is in any case *iotizo*. The adjective
"sigmatic" has, I think, a noun partner "sigmatism" rather than
"sigmaticism": my feeling about "-ism" and
"-icism" is that they may often represent very useful differences of
meaning. An English form "rhotism" would therefore be more neutral
than "rhoticism" -- or "rhotacism".
We lost a lot of Greek words in the Medieval religious holocaust of
books; among them I suspect may have been a few of this kind referring
to the use of letters of the alphabet.
An argument from modern American and Australian pronunciation is
dangerous: it would logically lead to dropping the now redundant "h",
after which the word might appear to have some connection with wheels.
If it were possible to put the wheel back on the wagon, I think I'd go
for euphony. Though as stickly a stickler as the best, I chose euphony
over regularity when suggesting "omicronic" and "omegatic" a week or
so ago. But I suppose "omicrous" and "omegalous" may yet find their
adherents.
Mike.
Ben Zimmer
Mike Lyle wrote:
> Shades of meaning apart, my inexpert ear makes me want the "rhoticist"
> forms rather than the "rhotacist" ones. A direct analogy with
> *iotakismos* is at best uncertain, as *iota* ends with an *a*; the
> corresponding verb in L&S is in any case *iotizo*. The adjective
> "sigmatic" has, I think, a noun partner "sigmatism" rather than
> "sigmaticism": my feeling about "-ism" and
> "-icism" is that they may often represent very useful differences of
> meaning. An English form "rhotism" would therefore be more neutral
> than "rhoticism" -- or "rhotacism".
Why, just last month John Hatpin used "rhotism" in a thread on
"mirror":
http://groups.google.com/groups?th=dbdae6d3c8fd35e2#link4
The lone Googlehit for "rhotism" suggests it's the name of an
articulation disorder:
http://www.med.nus.edu.sg/paed/neurology.htm
If "rhotism" caught on, it would no doubt spawn "rhotistic".
> If it were possible to put the wheel back on the wagon, I think I'd go
> for euphony. Though as stickly a stickler as the best, I chose euphony
> over regularity when suggesting "omicronic" and "omegatic" a week or
> so ago. But I suppose "omicrous" and "omegalous" may yet find their
> adherents.
And "rhotous", "rhotosity"?
John Hatpin
I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to the
Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of words such
as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
This is confusing, because there is no R sound. "Bath" is rendered as
"bahth", not "barth". I refer to this as a "long A" - is there a
better description?
--
John H
Yorkshire, England
John Holmes
"GrapeApe" <grap...@aol.comjunk> wrote in message
news:20020915132204...@mb-cg.aol.com...
>
> So can we say:
>
> Nonrhoticism: Beeya
> Rhoticism: Beer
> Rhotacism: I'm from Chicargo.
I don't think there's really a 'y' (or [j]) in non-rhotic beer; it's
more like bee-@, where the @ is the pronunciation of the 'r'.
> That is, rhotacism is only the use of an r sound in situations it
should not
> exist according to the written word for a rhotic speaker? It seems
rather
> similar to the idear of the intrusive r.
Past threads here have also talked about hyper-rhoticism (was Richard
Nixon given as an example?). Does hyper-rhoticism just mean a very heavy
pronunciation of the 'r', or does it also involve some degree intrusive
r? Is it synonymous with rhotacism?
--
Regards
John
Jacqui
> I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to
> the Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of
> words such as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
>
> This is confusing, because there is no R sound. "Bath" is
> rendered as "bahth", not "barth". I refer to this as a "long A" -
> is there a better description?
As a southerner I would pronounce "bahth" and "barth" differently,
and my pronunciation of Bath would tend to the latter i.e. there IS
an R sound in it, albeit unintended.
(However, I'm being corrupted by a Lancastrian who, despite 15 years
down here, has not lost his accent. I am tending to the northern A
more and more these days. Argh!)
Jac
Richard Fontana
On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, John Holmes wrote:
> Past threads here have also talked about hyper-rhoticism (was Richard
> Nixon given as an example?).
Yes, as well as the white-moustachioed, Sipowicz-shirt-wearing guy who
used to appear on the Apex Tech commercials, regional origin unknown, and
Wilford Brimley, who seems to be mainly southern Californian (like Nixon).
> Does hyper-rhoticism just mean a very heavy
> pronunciation of the 'r', or does it also involve some degree intrusive
> r? Is it synonymous with rhotacism?
There's no particular intrusive 'r' in these accents other than maybe that
Midland "warsh" sort of pronunciation, which I've heard in at least one
southern Californian speaker (a Pasadena native). Nixon's accent speaks
for itself.
I've been trying to pin down the various sorts of Southern California
accents for some time, and recently made some progress. One type appears
to be exemplified by the accent of actor/director Ron Howard (Opie on
_Andy Griffith_ and Richie Cunningham on _Happy Days_). Howard was born
in Oklahoma but moved to the Los Angeles area by age 5. It's difficult to
describe the Ron Howard accent, but you know it when you hear it. It's
characterized by a certain sort of hint-of-Southern "twanginess" that's
reminiscent of some Western Pennsylvania accents (see, e.g., Mister
Rogers), and it has some of the "mouth full of spit" qualities that you
also hear in the otherwise completely different accents of Chicago. The
"mouth full of spit" feature may be what links it to the Nixonian
hyperrhotic accent (I wouldn't call the Ron Howard accent particularly
hyperrhotic).
The weird thing that I realized was that President George Bush Sr. seems
to also have an accent that's a bit reminiscent of the Fred Rogers Western
Pennsylvania accent. Am I thinking too much of Dana Carvey's
impersonation? Bush was a patrician Easterner from Connecticut who
settled in Texas as a young man (where he probably altered his accent, but
perhaps not to a true Texas type, although there are Midland (no relation
to Midland Texas I assume) accents in some parts of Texas, I believe (the
Panhandle? And that's close to Oklahoma, where Opie Cunningham was
born)).
A Texan here once stated that Texans think of Bush Sr.'s accent
as "Yankee", but us New York people at least assumed it was some sort of
Texas accent, given the presence of "twanginess". Does Bush Sr. in
actuality have a Los Angeles accent, like that of Opie Cunningham? If so,
how did he get it? In the military? (It's well known that no matter how
brief one's service in the U.S. military, the experience always ends up
completely altering the speaker's accent; it's also well known that there
is some sort of "professional military" accent that, to New York people at
least, sounds "vaguely Southern". Could that "vague Southernness"
actually be no different from Southern California twanginess? Postwar
California was chock-full of military people and their fellow travellers
[such as people in the defense contractor industries].)
John Hatpin
>John Hatpin wibbled:
>
>> I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to
>> the Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of
>> words such as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
>>
>> This is confusing, because there is no R sound. "Bath" is
>> rendered as "bahth", not "barth". I refer to this as a "long A" -
>> is there a better description?
>
>As a southerner I would pronounce "bahth" and "barth" differently,
>and my pronunciation of Bath would tend to the latter i.e. there IS
>an R sound in it, albeit unintended.
How do you pronounce "maths", then? If your vowel sound is different
between "baths" and "maths" (I'm guessing it is), can you account for
the difference?
If you encounter a word new to you (for example, "gaths" [1]), how
would you determine which way to pronounce the A?
This is not a troll - I've been curious about this for years.
>(However, I'm being corrupted by a Lancastrian who, despite 15 years
>down here, has not lost his accent. I am tending to the northern A
>more and more these days. Argh!)
My ten-year-old son pronounces some words ("grass", for example) with
an "ah" sound, which I'm fairly sure comes from a London-born
child-minder he went to for a time when he was four. It's often
surprising how infectious accents can be.
[1] Well, I'd not heard of it until I Googled, anyway ...
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>>As a southerner I would pronounce "bahth" and "barth" differently,
>>and my pronunciation of Bath would tend to the latter i.e. there IS
>>an R sound in it, albeit unintended.
>
> How do you pronounce "maths", then? If your vowel sound is different
> between "baths" and "maths" (I'm guessing it is), can you account for
> the difference?
It's quite different. Maths is MAFF with a th (!), baths has that R in
it. [I can't do the /a/A/whatever thing.] It strikes me that sometimes
I subconsciously emphasise the r - I have a rural Oxfordshire accent as
well as an RP manner of speaking, and the "country" tendency to roll
non-existent Rs would come out in that word. Something between The
Archers and a sheep...
> If you encounter a word new to you (for example, "gaths" [1]), how
> would you determine which way to pronounce the A?
I would probably aim for gath rhyming with math. No particular reason,
it just would sound more "normal" that way, even though both "bath" and
"path" have the ar sound - maybe this is because I would be considering
the word "garth" to have that sound, and therefore "gath" must be
something different?
> This is not a troll - I've been curious about this for years.
No, this is aue and I'm sure it's used to such questions. :-)
Jac
MM
> John Hatpin wibbled:
>> Jacqui wrote:
>
>>>As a southerner I would pronounce "bahth" and "barth" differently,
>>>and my pronunciation of Bath would tend to the latter i.e. there IS
>>>an R sound in it, albeit unintended.
>>
>> How do you pronounce "maths", then? If your vowel sound is different
>> between "baths" and "maths" (I'm guessing it is), can you account for
>> the difference?
In this specific case, I would say that the difference is explained by
the fact that "maths" is short for mathematics and thus it retains the
same short "a" sound. Likewise, a pathology student might shorten it to
path. (hmm, do they actually do that? I don't remember, exactly), which
has a short "a", unlike the word "path" ;-)
However, ....
>> If you encounter a word new to you (for example, "gaths" [1]), how
>> would you determine which way to pronounce the A?
>
> I would probably aim for gath rhyming with math. No particular reason,
.... I would also rhyme "gaths" with "maths". Similarly, I would rhyme
"zass" (I just made that up - does it actually exist?) with "mass", not
"pass" (which sounds like "parse").
I might not be "right", of course, but that's the problem with English.
You can't rely on the spelling ;-)
[When I say "right", I mean in agreement with other "southerners" who may
already know how to pronounce the word(s). I don't mean to suggest that
any particular accent is right, as compared to others]
MM
Mike Lyle
> Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
> > my feeling about "-ism" and
> > "-icism" is that they may often represent very useful differences of
> > meaning. An English form "rhotism" would therefore be more neutral
> > than "rhoticism" -- or "rhotacism".
>
> Why, just last month John Hatpin used "rhotism" in a thread on
> "mirror":
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?th=dbdae6d3c8fd35e2#link4
Well done, John, then.
>
> The lone Googlehit for "rhotism" suggests it's the name of an
> articulation disorder:
>
> http://www.med.nus.edu.sg/paed/neurology.htm
>
> If "rhotism" caught on, it would no doubt spawn "rhotistic".
I could live with that, as long as it nobody suggested it was caused
by a vaccination. Some turkey would, though, inevitably coin
"rhotisticism".
>
> > If it were possible to put the wheel back on the wagon, I think I'd go
> > for euphony. Though as stickly a stickler as the best, I chose euphony
> > over regularity when suggesting "omicronic" and "omegatic" a week or
> > so ago. But I suppose "omicrous" and "omegalous" may yet find their
> > adherents.
>
> And "rhotous", "rhotosity"?
I can't resist -- rules or no rules -- a sense that these suggest some
degree, perhaps a not disagreeable degree, of plumpness.
Mike.
Pat Durkin
"Richard Fontana" <rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.95.102091...@facstaff.wesleyan.edu...
I wonder if you have forgotten that other source of "twang" (my word for
it), the "downeast Maine" style. I don't know how much time Bush the
elder (or 41, as many are calling him) has spent at Kennebunkport, but
there is a certain nasality in his speech that I think could come from
there.
GrapeApe
>Dictionary" has to be used with more expert caution than I can offer,
>as it's extremely late and not reliable.
I heard it was one Suidas dictionary.
Aaron J. Dinkin
> Aaron J. Dinkin wrote:
>
>>On 15 Sep 2002 16:44:37 GMT, GrapeApe <grap...@aol.comjunk> wrote:
>>
>>> Even some accents generally considered non-rhotic will often regularly
>>> sound an R where there is none. I think British RP does this, placing
>>> an R inside words where it may not exist, yet not using it on the
>>> final r of a word.
>>
>>Are you thinking of words like "draw[r]ing"? This is called "intrusive
>>r", and it also happens across word boundaries: "the idea[r] of it". As
>>far as I know, it's impossible in RP to have a [r] before a consonant,
>>though.
>
> I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to the
> Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of words such
> as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
I don't believe I've ever heard this referred to as an "intrusive r". It
sounds very confusing, because, as you observe, no actual r intrudes.
> This is confusing, because there is no R sound. "Bath" is rendered as
> "bahth", not "barth". I refer to this as a "long A" - is there a
> better description?
I've encountered "broad a". "Long a", in reference to English, I only know
as the vowel of "late".
Ben Zimmer
"Aaron J. Dinkin" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 13:23:53 +0100, John Hatpin <ag...@brooREMOVEMEkview.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to the
> > Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of words such
> > as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
>
> I don't believe I've ever heard this referred to as an "intrusive r". It
> sounds very confusing, because, as you observe, no actual r intrudes.
The r intrudes orthographically in those non-rhotic "pronunciation
spellings" that confuse rhotic speakers so much. Such spellings crop
up for /A:/ or /O:/ (e.g., "marm" for "ma'am", "Eeyore" for
"(h)ee(h)aw"), as well as for /@/ (e.g., "er", "Winnie ther Pooh", Led
Zeppelin's "D'yer Maker"). Conversely, Leftpondian "ass" (the body
part, not the animal) and "hoss" grew out of a non-rhotic
pronunciation spellings of "arse" and "horse".
R J Valentine
...
} A Texan here once stated that Texans think of Bush Sr.'s accent
} as "Yankee", but us New York people at least assumed it was some sort of
} Texas accent, given the presence of "twanginess". Does Bush Sr. in
} actuality have a Los Angeles accent, like that of Opie Cunningham? If so,
} how did he get it? In the military? (It's well known that no matter how
} brief one's service in the U.S. military, the experience always ends up
} completely altering the speaker's accent; it's also well known that there
} is some sort of "professional military" accent that, to New York people at
} least, sounds "vaguely Southern". Could that "vague Southernness"
} actually be no different from Southern California twanginess?
Probably way different. After I got out of the Army, one of the first
courses I took was a required speech course that hadn't been required in
pharmacy school. The teacher listened to an introductory paragraph or so
from each class member, then went around to some nodding-in-agreement
telling people where she thought they had grown up. She had me pegged for
the mountains of Kentucky, though I had spent almost all of my civilian
life within walking distance of the Queens (NY) campus. She may not have
been that good, because she herself apparently had no idea that she
exhibited the Philadelphia "o". I suspect though that Army influences are
different from Southern California influences, and "mountains of Kentucky"
(where I had never been) may be as good a guess as any.
I don't think I ever sounded much like Bob Cunningham.
Another poster suggested Maine as an influence on Bush pere, and that
strikes me as more likely than military or California influences.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:r...@smart.net>
Jonathan Jordan
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 13:23:53 +0100, John Hatpin <ag...@brooREMOVEMEkview.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Aaron J. Dinkin wrote:
> >
> >>On 15 Sep 2002 16:44:37 GMT, GrapeApe <grap...@aol.comjunk> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Even some accents generally considered non-rhotic will often regularly
> >>> sound an R where there is none. I think British RP does this, placing
> >>> an R inside words where it may not exist, yet not using it on the
> >>> final r of a word.
> >>
> >>Are you thinking of words like "draw[r]ing"? This is called "intrusive
> >>r", and it also happens across word boundaries: "the idea[r] of it". As
> >>far as I know, it's impossible in RP to have a [r] before a consonant,
> >>though.
> >
> > I've also often heard the phrase "intrusive R" used to refer to the
> > Southern English habit of lengthening As in the middle of words such
> > as "bath" or "grass" (but not, oddly, "maths").
>
> I don't believe I've ever heard this referred to as an "intrusive r". It
> sounds very confusing, because, as you observe, no actual r intrudes.
I don't remember hearing the exact phrase "intrusive r" to describe
it, but it's quite common for non-rhotic northerners to suggest that
an "r" is somehow added. After all, a lot of southerners do pronounce
"bath" exactly as they would pronounce "barth".
>
> > This is confusing, because there is no R sound. "Bath" is rendered as
> > "bahth", not "barth". I refer to this as a "long A" - is there a
> > better description?
>
> I've encountered "broad a". "Long a", in reference to English, I only know
> as the vowel of "late".
>
I think "long A" is the commonest term in Britain (ignoring pejorative
terms). I've even heard "an Edgbaston accent has long As" (Edgbaston
being an area of Birmingham with something of a reputation for
snootiness). In context I think it's usually fairly clear whether
"long A" refers to the vowel of "late" or "bath".
I think "broad a" is mainly an American term.
Jonathan
Mike Lyle
John Hatpin
>In article <Xns928BAFA5F57...@62.253.162.106>, Jacqui wrote:
>> John Hatpin wibbled:
>>> Jacqui wrote:
>>
>>>>As a southerner I would pronounce "bahth" and "barth" differently,
>>>>and my pronunciation of Bath would tend to the latter i.e. there IS
>>>>an R sound in it, albeit unintended.
>>>
>>> How do you pronounce "maths", then? If your vowel sound is different
>>> between "baths" and "maths" (I'm guessing it is), can you account for
>>> the difference?
>
>In this specific case, I would say that the difference is explained by
>the fact that "maths" is short for mathematics and thus it retains the
>same short "a" sound. Likewise, a pathology student might shorten it to
>path. (hmm, do they actually do that? I don't remember, exactly), which
>has a short "a", unlike the word "path" ;-)
That's an interesting thought. I've heard "Path Lab" used for
"Pathology Laboratory" quite a lot. If there is a difference between
the A sound in the following:
"I walked down the garden path"
"I got the results from the Path Lab"
then that would tend to confirm the "maths"/"mathematics" link you
mentioned. Anyone?
Matti Lamprhey
> MM wrote in part:
In my experience in Britain, "Path Lab" and "maths" are always said with the
same short vowel as the full forms. I don't follow Jacqui's practice of
differentiating between "bath" and the city of "Bath", and can't see any
justification for doing so. After all, the city was named after an early
form of the utensil.
Matti
Jacqui
> In my experience in Britain, "Path Lab" and "maths" are always
> said with the same short vowel as the full forms. I don't follow
> Jacqui's practice of differentiating between "bath" and the city
> of "Bath", and can't see any justification for doing so. After
> all, the city was named after an early form of the utensil.
I don't, and I never said I did. All I said was that "bahth" and
"barth" are different for me, and Bath/bath/path/graph/grass (etc) all
have the extra "r" sound - barth - rather than the "bah" suggested by
John.
Jac
MM
Well, to me the two "path" words are pronounced very differently, but
only because I know that Path is short for Pathology. In the absence of
that knowledge, I would pronounce them both the same (like "parth" or
"pahth"). At the same time, of course, I would be somewhat curious as
to what happens in a Path Lab. Research into paths? Experiments on concrete
slabs?
MM
Matti Lamprhey
Sorry, I was responding to what you were quoted as saying rather than
checking back to your original. I still think that your distinction between
the nonexistent "bahth" and "barth" is confusing, though!
Matti
Richard Fontana
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Matti Lamprhey wrote:
> In my experience in Britain, "Path Lab" and "maths" are always said with the
> same short vowel as the full forms. I don't follow Jacqui's practice of
> differentiating between "bath" and the city of "Bath", and can't see any
> justification for doing so. After all, the city was named after an early
> form of the utensil.
An interesting note (which I've mentioned here before) is that many
Americans differentiate between "Bath" the city and "bath". The vast
majority of Americans use /&/ in "bath", but many will attempt an
imitation of a southern England pronunciation of "Bath", saying "bahth"
(using the 'father' vowel, /A/ or /a/). It's silly, but saying "Bath"
with one of those raised diphthongal GenAm /&/s can sound pretty silly too
if you're in England or talking about Jane Austen or something like that.
Richard Fontana
Could be. Mountains of Kentucky could be South Midland, it may be noted.
> I don't think I ever sounded much like Bob Cunningham.
That's probably true, but remember that Bob Cunningham's formative
linguistic experiences occurred not primarily in California but in such
places as the Hoover Dam Region, Utah, and Washington State, judging from
his own past comments. I've heard several samples of Bob's speech,
anyway, and it doesn't sound like any of the Southern California accents
I've been talking about (Wilford Brimley, Opie Cunningham, etc.).
> Another poster suggested Maine as an influence on Bush pere, and that
> strikes me as more likely than military or California influences.
His accent doesn't sound like any of the Maine accents I've heard.
There's something very non-Northeast-coastal-sounding about Bush pere's
accent. I remember seeing a little clip of Sen. Prescott Bush, Bush
pere's pere, giving a Christmas greeting, presumably in the 1930s or
thenabouts; as I recall he had the typical East Coast aristocrat accent of
the day, sort of FDR-ish.
Aaron J. Dinkin
I'm afraid I'm having trouble understanding what you mean here. Do you
mean that "bath" and "path" and so on all contain an actual [r] sound, as
in "real"? Or do you mean that the vowel you have in "bath" is the same as
that in a non-rhotic "bar"? What pronunciation do you intend to indicate
with the spelling <bahth>? What actual words have the vowel you're trying
to describe - "father"? "cat"?
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>> I don't, and I never said I did. All I said was that "bahth" and
>> "barth" are different for me, and Bath/bath/path/graph/grass
>> (etc) all have the extra "r" sound - barth - rather than the
>> "bah" suggested by John.
>
> I'm afraid I'm having trouble understanding what you mean here. Do
> you mean that "bath" and "path" and so on all contain an actual
> [r] sound, as in "real"? Or do you mean that the vowel you have in
> "bath" is the same as that in a non-rhotic "bar"? What
> pronunciation do you intend to indicate with the spelling <bahth>?
> What actual words have the vowel you're trying to describe -
> "father"? "cat"?
Think sheep - Baaaaa(r). Barth has almost a rolled r in it. It's a
very broad "country" a. Bahth is shorter. Similar vowel sound but no
r - the h makes it come up short, as it were, and almost adds a
breath sound. In "path" (etc) the a of "father" is the correct a for
me, the a of "cat" is correct for my husband (Lancastrian).
The problem essentially is that Oxfordshire doesn't fit neatly into
either of the two main accent groups in the UK. One lot say
path/bath (as in father) and cup with an "under" u, one lot say
path/bath (as in cat) and cup with a "good" oo. I say barth and
curp, when speaking with a local (birth) accent. Confused hell out
of my "Dialect" class when taking Communications at college in
Wiltshire.
Jac
GrapeApe
>courses I took was a required speech course that hadn't been required in
>pharmacy school. The teacher listened to an introductory paragraph or so
>from each class member, then went around to some nodding-in-agreement
>telling people where she thought they had grown up. She had me pegged for
>the mountains of Kentucky, though I had spent almost all of my civilian
>life within walking distance of the Queens (NY) campus. She may not have
>been that good, because she herself apparently had no idea that she
>exhibited the Philadelphia "o". I suspect though that Army influences are
>different from Southern California influences, and "mountains of Kentucky"
>(where I had never been) may be as good a guess as any.
Where were you taking the class compared to where you were raised?
Do you have a tendency to mimic?
You may have been exhibiting mixed influences beyond your normal personal
accent, and even if she was generally accurate, you were not providing a
typical sample
As a U.S. Southerner, when I visit Brooklyn, there is an odd mix and
cancellation between my natural accent and my habit to speak in the accent of
the person addressing me (This habit can end up being rather embarrasing in
restaurants, I do not mean to mock, it is just a natural habit). So when I am
in The City, most people can tell that I am not from around there, but they
can't place where. My accent actually sounds most like a Scottish brogue at
that point (common roots in the two accents family trees?)
GrapeApe
>
>Eh?
I sed, dat was one sweet ass dictionary.
Jonathan Jordan
I suppose that annoys me because it seems to derive from the erroneous
belief that "bahth" is "the British" pronunciation.
I suppose it could also derive from a recognition that saying
something like [be@T] (or even a middle-class New York [b&:T]) marks
the speaker as an obvious American tourist, as no short-A-in-bath
British dialect uses anything like [e@] for short A under any
circumstances, so far as I'm aware.
Jonathan
Jonathan Jordan
<snip>
>
> Think sheep - Baaaaa(r). Barth has almost a rolled r in it. It's a
> very broad "country" a. Bahth is shorter. Similar vowel sound but no
> r - the h makes it come up short, as it were, and almost adds a
> breath sound. In "path" (etc) the a of "father" is the correct a for
> me, the a of "cat" is correct for my husband (Lancastrian).
>
> The problem essentially is that Oxfordshire doesn't fit neatly into
> either of the two main accent groups in the UK. One lot say
> path/bath (as in father) and cup with an "under" u, one lot say
> path/bath (as in cat) and cup with a "good" oo. I say barth and
> curp, when speaking with a local (birth) accent. Confused hell out
> of my "Dialect" class when taking Communications at college in
> Wiltshire.
>
Do you mean that "cup" rhymes with "burp"?
I think most people pronounce "cup" and "under" with the same vowel.
I'm from the North (Sheffield) so I pronounce "bath" with the "cat"
vowel, but I _don't_ use the /U/ of "good" in "cup", unlike in
stereotypical North/Midlands speech - I use a sort of compromise vowel
[1], which I think is fairly typical. I do use /U/ in the adverb
"just" - this means I distinguish the adverb and adjective.
Which part of Oxfordshire? I'd say that most Oxon accents sound
definitely southern, but more south-western than south-eastern.
[1] Roughly like the final vowel in "sofa", but with rounded lips -
ASCII IPA [O"], I think.
Jonathan
Jacqui
> Do you mean that "cup" rhymes with "burp"?
It does. Take a bus out to Witney and listen for some locals at the
Co-op - the u sound is "ur" so I talk to my murm about durks, not
"my mum about ducks". (Of course if I really talk to my mother like
that she cuffs me round the head for not talking properly!)
> I think most people pronounce "cup" and "under" with the same
> vowel. I'm from the North (Sheffield) so I pronounce "bath" with
> the "cat" vowel, but I _don't_ use the /U/ of "good" in "cup",
> unlike in stereotypical North/Midlands speech - I use a sort of
> compromise vowel [1], which I think is fairly typical. I do use
> /U/ in the adverb "just" - this means I distinguish the adverb and
> adjective.
>
> Which part of Oxfordshire? I'd say that most Oxon accents sound
> definitely southern, but more south-western than south-eastern.
West is the strongest "ur", although South Oxon/Bucks has the same
sounds. I have what is essentially a South Oxon accent by birth but
a West Oxon accent by schooling (we moved in my teens) and an RP
voice by inclination. You can't judge Oxford city inhabitants as
having "an Oxfordshire accent" btw since most people here don't
actually have the rural burr. There are very few "i for ou" speakers
left (pind, hice, mice...).
> [1] Roughly like the final vowel in "sofa", but with rounded lips
> - ASCII IPA [O"], I think.
I know the vowel you mean, it's the one I acquire and use when up in
Bolton talking to my inlaws.
Jac
Mike Lyle
> >> I heard it was one Suidas dictionary.
> >
> >Eh?
>
> I sed, dat was one sweet ass dictionary.
Sorry, stupid of me. Betcherass, bro.
Mike.
Mike Lyle
> Jacqui <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote in message [...] say barth and
> > curp, when speaking with a local (birth) accent. Confused hell out
> > of my "Dialect" class when taking Communications at college in
> > Wiltshire.
> >
> Do you mean that "cup" rhymes with "burp"?
Pretty nearly, though not rhotic, and the cup sound is shorter. Lot of
Welsh people do it, too. Sometimes you'd swear you'd heard "kep".
[...]
Mike.