Thut
John Rowland
A problem with the English language is that the spelling "that" is used to
represent two different meanings with two different pronunciations. While it
is not unique in this, it seems to be by far the most common example, and
people reading to a crowd are often tripped up by this word, especially when
it appears at the end of a line or page.
For example ...
"I could see that
there was a problem coming."
... and ...
"I could see that
problem coming"
... are sentences in which no amount of previous context could give you any
clue as to how "that" should be pronounced, so the speaker ends up stumbling
in a humiliated fashion over the second half of the sentence, and usually
ends up repeating the entire sentence using the correct pronunciation.
Since the meanings of the stressed "that" and the unstressed "that" are
quite distinct, I believe that there is a case for respelling the unstressed
word to "thut", since it rhymes with the way "but" is generally pronounced.
I am not normally into spelling reform, but "that" creates a unique problem
for public speakers, so I'm wondering if any academics have ever suggested
this?
TIA.
--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/7069/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes
Dave Fawthrop
<jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| A problem with the English language is that the spelling "that" is used to
| represent two different meanings with two different pronunciations. While it
| is not unique in this, it seems to be by far the most common example, and
| people reading to a crowd are often tripped up by this word, especially when
| it appears at the end of a line or page.
|
| For example ...
|
| "I could see that
| there was a problem coming."
|
| ... and ...
|
| "I could see that
| problem coming"
|
| ... are sentences in which no amount of previous context could give you any
| clue as to how "that" should be pronounced, so the speaker ends up stumbling
| in a humiliated fashion over the second half of the sentence, and usually
| ends up repeating the entire sentence using the correct pronunciation.
|
| Since the meanings of the stressed "that" and the unstressed "that" are
| quite distinct, I believe that there is a case for respelling the unstressed
| word to "thut", since it rhymes with the way "but" is generally pronounced.
|
| I am not normally into spelling reform, but "that" creates a unique problem
| for public speakers, so I'm wondering if any academics have ever suggested
| this?
Both are pronounced "that" with a short 'a'. Thut is never used.
Dave Fawthrop <a Tyke born and bred>
John Graney
<hyp...@hyphenologist.co.uk> writes
certainly used in parts of the south of England. Whilst what you say
may be true for Yorkshire and many other places or accents 'never' is
too strong a word to use.
Personally I do not think that the spelling needs to be reformed.
J:
--
John Graney
David
Hm? Just think of all the new spellings we could have for all the
different ways in which the same words are pronounced in different
positions or just in front of different words. And of course, we'd
certainly have to have different spellings for the same words written
in different parts of the country.
I wonder why the OP picked on "that"? Surely "the" in front of vowel or
consonant would be a better choice to start off with?
--
http://www.dacha.freeuk.com/photo/0z03-0.htm
Snowdon . . . misted by shadow and sunbeams
Einde O'Callaghan
"That" is only one of numerous words with both a "strong" (i.e.
stressed) form and a "weak" (i.e. unstressed) form. The weak form of
"that" occurs not only when "that" is a conjunction, but also when it is
a relative pronoun and occasionally even when it is an indicative.
Regards, einde o'Callaghan