Are some people overly sensitive about the pronunciation of words?
Look at the English language - there are so many differenct accents, but we
all get by without a fuss. Why can't we do the same with the pronunciation
of "Maori" words?
Hard to say bro.
>"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote in message
>news:ibdfc5$d7p$2...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> So it may legally be “Kapiti”, but it’s quite clear lots of people
>> instinctively pronounce it as “K?piti”.
>
>Are some people overly sensitive about the pronunciation of words?
>
>Look at the English language - there are so many differenct accents, but we
>all get by without a fuss. Why can't we do the same with the pronunciation
>of "Maori" words?
Actually we already do.
--
Brian Dooley
Wellington New Zealand
The language is slowly expiring anyway. Despite all initiatives e.g.
maori TV, a recent Waitangi Tribunal report shows that fewer and fewer
people are interested in taking it up.
Even our prime minister shtruggles to pronounce words clearly . . .
Oh, well, good then. I thought the OP was making an issue about whether one
pronounced "Kapiti" as Kap-iti, or Kaahp-iti. (With an "a" or an "ah"
sound).
The one that always gets me is "Kiribati".
He can speak properly and did so in a follow-up speech after Hilary
Clinton had spoken during her visit here last week, matching her with
commendable clarity and at a steady, controlled pace.
A pleasant if rare moment from him.
> So it may legally be �Kapiti�, but it�s quite clear lots of people
> instinctively pronounce it as �Kāpiti”.
Given the english alphabet does NOT contain any letters with macrons,
umlauts, or other such additions I believe the ONLY correct spelling is
Kapiti
That's statistics for you. It simply means there are fewer than they would
like. There never was much interest.
I don't recall that, but heard of his 'slip of the tongue'. I agree
that clear speech fromhim would be a pleasant if rare moment from him.
it would have been good. For such an event he was probably carefully
coached in both what to say (including the 'slip of the tongue'), and
how to say it.
Interesting interview by Mike Hosking of former Australian PM - John Howard
last week. Howard referred to '(Tony) Blair and I's decision ......'
Part of the problem is we have official maori and how different iwi
pronounce words. they don't always match and can lead to interesting
discussions between Maori speakers from different iwi who wern't taught
'official' Maori.
Pooh
Americans have trouble understanding New Zealanders because we have a
tendency to speak quickly. I have friends in the states who have learnt over
the last couple of years to remind me to speak slowly so they can understand
me.
Pooh
IO believe Whanganui is the most recent high profile instance of that.
For some reason "NAtional Radio" have taken to pronouncing it as
fonganui, which is I believe closer to Northern Maori pronunciation -
in Whanganui the Maori are more likely to say whonganui, with the wh
sound as in where (not as in wear). Of course many Pakeha pronouce
those two words the same way . . .
>
>"Sweetpea" <Heri...@Sweetpea.com> wrote in message
>news:pan.2010.11...@Sweetpea.com...
>> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:43:30 +0000, -Newsman- wrote:
>>
>>> He can speak properly and did so in a follow-up speech after Hilary
>>> Clinton had spoken during her visit here last week, matching her with
>>> commendable clarity and at a steady, controlled pace.
>>
>> He was probably speaking slowly so that Americans could understand a non-
>> American.
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
>
>Americans have trouble understanding New Zealanders because we have a
>tendency to speak quickly.
Add slovenly diction and you end up with unintelligibility.
>I have friends in the states who have learnt over
>the last couple of years to remind me to speak slowly so they can understand
>me.
And likewise, they will hope that you will have learnt to speak more
clearly.
It's not really about speed, it's about **clarity**. Speed **with**
clarity requires clean articulation and that is what is innately
lacking in people like Key.
When you speak clearly rather than gabble, slither and word-swallow,
not only your American friends but others will have a better chance of
understanding what you're trying to put across.
And, who knows, your cred may even improve.
He's a shocker isn't he? I like the way he says texts. It sounds like texes.
You say pot8o, I say...
His problem is bad articulation caused by what might seem like
impaired motor function. Brain and tongue seem so uncoordinated that
at times he's virtually unintelligible, especially when interviewed on
microphone. The impression given is "Oh shit, let's get this over
with and fast" haste and nervousness.
But with Clinton at his shoulder he appeared to accommodate and adapt
to her exemplary standard of delivery with no difficulty.
No possible reason why he shouldn't continue to deliver in this
manner. Whatever his other qualities, an inability to articulate
clearly in his own tongue when he appears to suffers no actual speech
impediment per se seems like casual offhandedness. But this could be
interpreted as a masking of the innate insecurity of he who fears
being dismissed for the unpardonable sin of appearing "too clever."
IOW, a self-serving projection of "The common touch".
There is no doubt that the speech was written by someone else, as
is common practice, and that he was coached, as is also common
practice and (in this case) common sense.
>"Brian Dooley" <bri...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
>news:t1lkd699s030166c0...@4ax.com...
>>
>> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:01:47 +1300, "Peter K"
>> <pe...@parcelvej.dk> wrote:
>>
>>>"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote in message
>>>news:ibdfc5$d7p$2...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>>> So it may legally be "Kapiti", but it's quite clear lots of people
>>>> instinctively pronounce it as "K?piti".
>>>
>>>Are some people overly sensitive about the pronunciation of words?
>>>
>>>Look at the English language - there are so many differenct accents, but
>>>we
>>>all get by without a fuss. Why can't we do the same with the pronunciation
>>>of "Maori" words?
>>
>> Actually we already do.
>
>Oh, well, good then. I thought the OP was making an issue about whether one
>pronounced "Kapiti" as Kap-iti, or Kaahp-iti. (With an "a" or an "ah"
>sound).
>
>The one that always gets me is "Kiribati".
That's because it isn't English.
Neither is Irish.
That's because his English is a bit dodgy.
Agreed about "Kapiti", but not about the diaeresis (why on earth are
are you using the German name for a sound mutation that has no
relation to English?). The diaeresis signifies that the vowel so
marked is to be pronounced separately and is not silent or part of a
diphthong. It is a valid option in a few English words such as
coöperation.
What make me laugh are those silly pricks who use the diaeresis in
place of a macron when writing English words which are derived from
Maori. "Mäori" would be pronounced "May-oree", which I am sure is not
what they intend.
LW
Oh gee! Newsman doesn't like me. Who cares he's just a bloody whinging pom
who can only show what a dimbulb he is in reality.
Pooh
Funnily enough I've never seen a retraction that New Zealanders speak better
english than poms even the toffee nosed plumby voiced ones like you Newsman.
Personaly I've never had a desire to be mistaken for you or your ilk
Newsman.
Pooh
plummy
>voiced ones like you Newsman.
>Personaly
Personally
>I've never had a desire to be mistaken for you or your ilk
>Newsman.
>
So you lack all ambition. There's a surprise!
Wrong. My ambitions are along different lines to sounding like some pommie
prat, Newsman. i'm morethan happy to speak with my New Zealand accent and
retain the iddiocyncrisies of the New Zealand culture rather than be a wanna
be whinging pom like you.
Pooh
>On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 21:53:22 +0000, -Newsman- wrote:
>
>> And likewise, they will hope that you will have learnt to speak more
>> clearly.
>
>Presumably you meant "...to speak with greater clarity"?
>
>"Clear" is an adjective and it doesn't have a comparative. Adverbs
>likewise aren't comparative - a person either speaks clearly or they
>don't.
O most merciful Redeemer, Friend, and Brother,
May we know Thee more clearly,
Love Thee more dearly,
Follow Thee more nearly,
Day by day.
Amen
(Richard, Bishop of Chester)
>On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:24:27 +1300, Pooh wrote:
>
>> Americans have trouble understanding New Zealanders because we have a
>> tendency to speak quickly. I have friends in the states who have learnt
>> over the last couple of years to remind me to speak slowly so they can
>> understand me.
>
>It's not that NZers speak quickly - but that Americans speak so extremely
>slowly.
Like so many carelessly offered generalisations, yours is false.
Isn't it 'idiotsyncracies'?
Could be, but why not ask Pooh? He obviously has a Fowler and a
Chambers at his elbow for his every illuminating post.
>Quoting a British ponce does not make up for the fact that there are no
>comparative forms of adverbs, and "more" is an adjective and adjectives
>qualify nouns.
"...does not make up for the fact that..." is somewhat clumsy. Next
time, "...doesn't alter the fact that..." will convey your meaning
more elegantly, though placing a gerund at the start of your false
assertation doesn't make your linguistic toiling any easier.
However, in the above you will have observed:
1. Adverbs, each of which qualifies an adverb.
2. That unlike some peevish little bell-hop ponce in Wellington,
Richard, Bishop of Chester knew that "more" is used either as
adjective or adverb according to context.
Q.E.D.
Nope. But I do have a Roget and Oxford somewhere around.
Pooh
Jolly good. But word is you spend an unhealthy amount of time looking
up your Fowler.