|
Comments:
Leighton - 2005-02-03 22:10:09 I had to laugh at the horse's head allusion, but you make a good point: it may be a case of just hearing the word instead of reading it--just by looking at it (although not true for many English words) the pronunciation is obvious. I have to add that I ride crowded buses every day to work and I am always without exception the only person reading a newspaper. There are usually 1 or 2 students reading a textbook on the way to WCC and there's the book guy, but that's it, out of 30 or so people (not bragging, just observing).* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-03 22:46:09 ...and, though Ypsidixit is a soldier in the descriptivist battalion of the descriptivist--prescriptivist language-use wars, "nuke-you-lur" is a bridge too far.* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2005-02-03 23:04:01 I also loved the horse's head in Merrian's bed.* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2005-02-03 23:04:46 that'd be with an m* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-03 23:26:35 Not to worry, Addiann--apparently anything goes these days. :)* * * * * * * * * * * * Leighton - 2005-02-04 02:26:03 There was an episode of Murphy Brown where she makes fun of that Nuclear pronounciation and the people who use it. But this was during Quayle's time. I never thought we'd end up with an actual president who would make Quayle look smart. * * * * * * * * * * * * farlane - 2005-02-04 09:03:36 What??? How can Merriam-Webster say that it is correct to pronounce "nuclear" this way? The only way would be if you you totally closed your eyes to the bald facts and ... wait, I think I answered my question.* * * * * * * * * * * * tom - 2005-02-04 10:16:38 Other pronunciations that grate on me are ree-la-tor for Realtor and jew-ler-ree for jewelry. Don't know what Merriam says about them.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 10:20:35 "Ree-la-tor" and "jew-ler-ree" sound ridiculous and pretentious. Reminds me of that Jaguar car commercial that was playing on the radio a lot a couple months back. They didn't say, "Jag Gwar," they said "Jag You Are." Oh, it irritated me. * * * * * * * * * * * * Anna - 2005-02-04 10:20:42 Thank goodness. Everyone in my nucular family can't be wrong about this. I mean, hey, if Homer Simpson and George Bush use "nucular weapons", then it's good enough for me. I hate those intellectual snobs who think it's "right" to prounce words properly. * * * * * * * * * * * * Anna - 2005-02-04 10:23:54 As for "jewelry" -- that must be a regional thing, because everyone around me growing up pronounced it with somewhere between two and three syllables (the "uh" there but barely, more like a pause). And "ree-la-tor" isn't pretentious, it's just wrong -- there's no 'a' world in which "real" is pronounced "ree-la".* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 10:26:14 No, but they say it that way to sound la dee dah. Plus they trademarked the term "realtor," making sure to put a capital letter on it in the process. Yep. The term "realtor" cannot be used in a generic way in a publication without its being capitalized, which grates on my nerves no end.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 10:28:01 (at a certain local publication, I know the staff uses "realty agent," eschewing "realtor" entirely). I prefer "house salesman/saleswoman." Let's strip away the nonsense, here.* * * * * * * * * * * * Sleez-e - 2005-02-04 10:34:06 Realtor, I pronounce it "Former pot dealer who can't suceed in anything else if they tried"* * * * * * * * * * * * Michael McC. - 2005-02-04 11:04:06 In Michigan, where some people say "wrench the warsh", the word often comes out "jewry".* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 11:06:15 As a lifelong Michigander I admit I say "jewry" for "jewelry". Also "Feb'wary" for the month, plus the classic "melk" for "milk." Charming regionalisms, all.* * * * * * * * * * * * be OH be - 2005-02-04 13:17:42 Don't mean to diminish your rant, Laura, but Jaguar is a British company and that is how the word is pronounced in the UK. http://www.merriamwebster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=jaguar* * * * * * * * * * * * Michael McC. - 2005-02-04 13:19:19 And "reglar" for regular. Of course, that doesn't compare to the loss of tenses, as in "we be goin to the store". That would be yesterday, today and tomorrow that we be goin. Not to mention, "toy are us". Although those may be culturalisms, rather than regionalisms.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 13:24:32 be Oh be, I didn't know that. However, Brit pronunciation/company name or no, the common pronunciation here is just Jag Gwar and doing otherwise sounds just plain silly. In my opinion. Michael: I'm trying to think of more Michiganisms. "Slider" would be one, as in, "Gimme a bag a sliders and a medium fried clams" at White Castle.* * * * * * * * * * * * LF - 2005-02-04 13:56:30 be OH be beat me to the Brit pronunciation of Jaguar but I was wondering if the pronunciation changes to Jag Gwar since Ford owns Jaguar now. Then there is Jag Wire, which you hear now and then. Dan Arbor had a buddy who used to talk about his hope to own a Newkulure Jagwire one day. Laura - since you say "melk", do you also say "pellow"?* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 14:03:18 Yes. And I hear the lack-of-short-i all the time in other pure-D Michiganders.* * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2005-02-04 20:51:27 Jaguar may be a British car company, but it was named after a jungle cat, which is pronounced "Jag Gwar." Just because the British insist on mispronouncing the jungle cat's name does not mean it is correct. The jungle cat is the source of the name of the car company, and it ought to be pronounced corrrectly ("Jag Gwar"), UK pronounciation predillections notwithstanding. * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2005-02-04 21:00:21My fave Michiganderism is the tendency to modify a sentence with the phrase "take and..." Example: "What you wanna do is, you want to take and give her a little gas before you let out the clutch." Or: "Take and haul them pallets over to the other end of the warehouse." Another fun little regionalism is to add the possessive 's' when pronouncing the names of certain businesses: "Ford's" "Meijer's" "K-Mart's" "Kroger's" * * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2005-02-04 22:08:18The British pronounce the word fillet (as in fish or a lovely steak) as 'Fill It, just to irritate the French, I've heard. * * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-04 23:31:24 Dan: Those are interesting. I have heard "take and," and so far as I can tell it means sth like "go ahead and"...do you think that's so? You're right about the possessive s on businesses. I always say "Meijer's" and "Kroger's", but say "Ford" and "K-Mart." I didn't even realize this was a little linguistic regionalism till you mentioned it. Addiann: that's funny. * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2005-02-05 00:09:09 Laura - I think you're mostly right about how 'take and..' is used, but it almost seems to fall in between that, and acting as a placeholder phrase, too. What's a placeholder phrase? Well, when I listen to Americans speak, as compared to, say, Canadians, I am struck by how much extraneous, yet meaningless verbage we stick into our sentences. It's as if we can't really think of more to say, but we're afraid of the silence that would ensue if we didn't keep talking. That, or we're just really bad at thinking on our feet... :) By contrast, other English-speaking countries don't seem to waste words with the same frequency. I am sometimes struck by how much more fully-formed their verbal expression is when compared to that of Americans. And sure, it all depends on who is doing the talking, American or not. But, I am wondering if this is the manifestation of perhaps a less rigorous education than that of other countries. * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2005-02-05 00:21:36But complaining about the education level in America aside, I would also separate 'take and...' and other regionalisms and colloquial expressions from the problem that started this thread; words that are used, spelled or pronounced incorrectly. Like nuclear. Under the rules set forth in English, the word is pronounced "nu-CLE-ar." Period. At the risk of sounding like a militant grammarian, The president's pronounciation is not a variant, it is simply incorrect. To suggest otherwise is to fail to understand the mechanics of English. Which is why it is so very disppointing that a dictionary would attempt to legitimize such sloppy approximation of diction. * * * * * * * * * * * * LF - 2005-02-05 21:17:37Volume of use dictates the evolution of a language. If enough people adopt the incorrect word, then the language adopts it in turn. * * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2005-02-05 22:18:14 (going back to read that descriptivist/prescriptivist language warlink)* * * * * * * * * * * * addiann - 2005-02-05 22:47:03 I line up with the "rules set forth for English" prescriptivists. Part of my reasoning comes from have spent more than a decade editing words. But it distresses me, too, to hear and see the graceful, precise use of the language fade away.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-06 01:19:02 I'm a descriptivist in theory, but a strict prescriptivist in practice at work. I try to write clearly and precisely. But I toss in as much slang and neologisms as I can get away with, like describing a pretzel-maker as a "pretzelatier" or a movie as a "glamfest." Those get by the editors because they're accurate & descriptive. But an ambiguous sentence wouldn't make it. What it boils down to is that in every age there are (many) poor writers butchering the language and also (a few) good writers who cherish it and sustain a tradition of clear, simple, good English. The graceful, precise use of the language is not fading away; if it were, the Atlantic, Harper's, New Yorker, and the like would be long dead by now, though I grant you their circulations aren't as large as I wish they were.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-06 01:39:47 Dan: I think the best dictionaries are those with the widest focus, chronicling every (mis)use of a word in order to act as a sort of cultural mirror. Merriam-W. took pains to point out that the mispronunciation of "nuclear" was "widely disapproved of." They also reflected that many high-powered types use that pronunciation--a debateable point, if you ask me. At any rate, whether it's the parents of 20s-era flappers who despair to see their slinkily-dressed daughters' slangy argot enshrined in a dictionary or the parents of a 60s-era hippie lamenting that disgusting drug patois is now legitimized in a reference book, it's plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-06 01:46:05 It must be noted that Merriam-W. is not the best dictionary out there. By a long shot. Ypsidixit once won an American Heritage dictionary in a contest and it is the most worthless piece of crap you could imagine. There are very few really good dictionaries. Ypsidixit is most fond of the OED, Brit leanings notwithstanding, and uses a one-volume edition of this excellent dictionary at work.* * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2005-02-06 21:10:28 Agreeing with LF in spirit, I would say that language, its words, and spellings, pronunciations, and meanings are not static things. For a language to continue to serve the needs of its speakers, it must be dynamic and fluid. It must evolve. But, the nuclear example is unique. Because we are not really talking about a simple difference of pronunciation (as in 'toMAYto' vs. 'toMAHto') as you cannot pronounce "cl" as a "kyu" sound in English. We are also not really talking about a simple difference in spelling (as in 'color' vs. 'colour') because in those cases, the words are still pronounced the same way. Normally, I would even be tempted to the middle ground if "nu-KYU-ler" was offered up as an alternate pronunciation, and only if it were used with an alternative spelling of the word. But, the real problem here is that nuclear is a word used to describe things pertaining to its root word 'nucleus,' not 'nuculus,' as that particular variant doesn't exist. But, this pronunciation doesn't even meet the precedents set for alternatives of spelling, meaning or pronunciation. However popular, it's simply incorrect, and Merriam should not have caved on this one. I also agree with 'cultural mirror' notion, as that is part of what I would think of as a living language. But, let's be careful as to which defines which. Finally, so what if many 'high-powered' types (including our president) are using the incorrect version? To my mind, this is only evidence that these people need more schooling, not that we should change the language to make their version correct. Not only does the emperor have no clothes, he apparently cannot speak the damn language! Laura - to your point about some dictionaries being better than others; yep. It is also my opinion that OED would never have considered a move like this. * * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-06 22:36:59Dan, I find your points very well-considered and convincing--you have convinced me, anyways, once I realized that this is the only example of incorrect English presented as correct that I can think of. For example, I can think of English speakers who say "you was wrong," and yet this "alternative" use of the verb is nowhere in any dictionary. I guess if it's the elite making the mistake, it becomes gospel. Incidentally, the OED welcomes people to become readers and add new words to the dictionary. Info and application forms here. Maybe someone should tip them off that this hot new pronunciation is all the rage over here in the land of many freedoms, including the freedom to corrupt any linguistic rules you like.* * * * * * * * * * * * LF - 2005-02-07 13:56:31 I should have added that I am not fond of our language evolving through mass misuse and mispronunciation. It only rewards the dullards and lazy asses. Every time I hear someone say nuke-you-ler, it makes my skin crawl. I personally hold our President to a higher standard than the rest of us and if little old me with an EMU education can figure it out, Mr. Yale Legacy should be able to do the same. I do enjoy a good metaplasm for entertainment's sake, however. And Laura is absolutely right - the American Heritage dictionary is barely suited for use as a door stop, let alone a reference tool.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-07 14:07:14 Oh, I would not knock an EMU education. The art and education departments are particularly good. Besides, as with anything, you get out of it what you put into it. I'd guess you put more into and got more out of your education than Mr. Yale Legacy did. LF, you introduced me to an interesting and useful new word which I didn't know: metaplasm. Yes, my "good" dictionary (Oxford Encyclopedic) is at work; half the time when I try to find stuff in the Am. Her. at home, it's just not there. At any rate.* * * * * * * * * * * * LF - 2005-02-07 14:11:26 Oh boy, I wasn't trying to demean EMU. I had some outstanding instructors there, with real passion for teaching. Most importantly, I learned a lot while I was there.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-07 14:15:21 I didn't think you were trying to demean EMU. I too had some very gifted, passionate, exhilerating instructors there, and also learned a lot.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-07 14:17:50 ...sorry for not expressing myself more clearly, LF. My "wouldn't knock" comment was just in general, not aimed at/critical of you needless to say. At any rate.* * * * * * * * * * * * Andy - 2005-02-08 04:28:05 Laura, you introduced me to an interesting and useful new word which I didn't know: "exhilerating". ;)* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2005-02-08 09:29:20 thanks Andy. :)* * * * * * * * * * * * add your comment: |