So, I’ve been teaching phonetics for a few years now, and each semester, I experience the joys of scrambling to find a word (or word-word pair) which exhibits a certain phonological trait or change. Because the examples you come up with on the spot are completely absurd, this brings me considerable joy.
For example, English has a phonological process called “Dental Assimilation”. In this process, an alveolar sound (like /t/, /n/ or /l/) becomes dentalized (made with the tongue behind the teeth) before dental sounds (/ð/ or /θ/). In order to demonstrate this (or better still, to test students), you need to come up with sets of words in which one word ends with an alveolar sound and the next starts with a dental sound.
Of course, there are a few common cases (“that thing”), but inevitably, in front of 66 people (or when asked to give an example on an exam), you can’t think of something reasonable like “can’t think”. So, you come up with something on the spot, and end up with something like “stupid thyroid” or “bell thief”.
To get these wonderful word pairs the recognition they deserve, I propose a neologism (a new word for an existing concept). I recommend that henceforth and forever more, a word combination which would be completely absurd in any context other than demonstrating phonology should be called a pine thug, in honor of the best/worst pair I’ve ever come up with in front of a classroom.
I know, I know, it’s tough to get a good neologism going. Most are gone within a few months (cf. “linsanity”), and barring political necessity (as has propelled “santorum“, a neologism created explicitly to mock Rick Santorum’s anti-gay stances), making a neologism stick is very difficult. However, I’ve known enough phonetics instructors (and students!) who acknowledge the agonies and ecstasies of pine thugs that maybe, just maybe, this one will take root.
Tagged with Language Change, Language Humor, Phonetics and Phonology, Words, Phrases, and Idioms | Leave a Comment
Just a quick note: My absolute favorite phonetics instruction software is sndpeek by Princeton Sound Lab, a real time Fast Fourier Transform and Waveform display program. Unfortunately, because Apple deprecated a bunch of old audio methods, it was broken with the update to Lion. However, some kind soul has updated the software to be Lion compatible, and it’s back to working like a charm. To download it, visit the sndpeek website and click on the “mac (mac osx lion) binary”.
To install, download the tgz file (the below code assumes you’ve downloaded it to the desktop), double click it to expand, then open a terminal and type:
cd ~/Desktop/sndpeek-1.3-exe
(then hit "enter")
sudo cp bin/sndpeek /bin/
Once you hit enter after typing the above command, OS X will then ask for your OS X administrator password (to copy the file deep into the filesystem), and once you’ve done that, at any point in the future, you’ll be able to just type “sndpeek” into a terminal and it’ll pop up a window displaying whatever sound source is selected in your Sound input preference pane. I usually give a more complex command to produce a prettier output, “sndpeek –logfactor:0.5 –lissajous:OFF –features:OFF –depth:150′”
I encourage you to play with the software as there are few better tools to help understand what a spectral slice is, how it works, and how spectrograms can be made. Enjoy!
Tagged with Computers and Software, Conventional Linguistics, Followups, Phonetics and Phonology | Leave a Comment
This morning, Consumerist linked to an article in Primer Magazine (for some reason), titled “10 Words You Mispronounce That Make People Think You’re an Idiot”.
With a name like that, it couldn’t be anything but judgmental pedantry, but even in an otherwise eyeroll-worthy article, I found that several of these words are actually completely reasonable pronunciations, and several of them demonstrate interesting phonological processes. So, I’m going to discuss them a little bit.
Athlete (pronounced with a schwa in the middle, “Ath-uh-leet” /æθəlit/)
This is a very reasonable and common pronunciation, which I noticed extensively in the speech of even experts on the subject (Michael Lewis, the author of Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game is a notable /æθəlit/ speaker. Here, the change likely comes from our dislike of having an interdental sound (/θ/) right next to a lateral (/l/). If you attempt to make the “correct” pronunciation, you’ll notice that your tongue is, in a sense, trapped between your front teeth, and to make a smooth gesture, you end up having to attempt to curve the sides of the middle and back of your tongue down. Which is unpleasant. So, it’s not shocking at all that speakers who use the word often may add the schwa.
(It’s also worth noting that there is no ‘H’ in Athlete, despite the author’s smug assertions that “there is no vowel between the ‘H’ and the ‘L’ in any of these words”. The English “TH” in this word is actually a single sound, a voiceless interdental fricative, which is nothing resembling an /h/. Once again, pedantry is seldom done well enough to be immune to further pedantry.)
Utmost (pronounced as “upmost”, /ʌpmowst/)
This is an awesome example of assimilation, two sounds becoming more like one another to make the speaker’s life easier, a phenomenon I’ve discussed before. Here, in the “correct” pronunciation, /ʌtmowst/, we have a /t/ sound, created at the alveolar ridge (just behind the teeth, try it) followed immediately by /m/, a bilabial sound created by pressing the two lips together.
When speakers are “mispronouncing” the word as /ʌpmowst/, they’re actually being more efficient, substituting in a /p/, also a bilabial sound, which allows them to simply close their lips (creating the /p/), then lower the velum (allowing nasal airflow) and start voicing to begin making the /m/. Going from /p/ to /m/ requires no additional tongue or lip movement, whereas going from /t/ to /m/ requires reconfiguration of the tongue and lips. Efficiency. Not quite the idiot pronunciation he’s claiming.
Sherbet (pronounced as “sher-bert”, /ʃɜɹbəɹt/)
Why does Primer Magazine hate assimilation? The first syllable has an “err” (/ɜɹ/) sound, why not the second syllable too? If we can keep the whole word vaguely “r-sounding” (“rhotic”, in phonetic terms), all the better. Speakers love regularity. Primer Magazine doesn’t.
“For all intensive Purposes”
This is really a horsed zebra. For further discussion of this, see a post I made last week.
Often (pronounced as “offen”, /ɑfɪn/)
How many Americans say “often” with the /t/, ever? This is textbook deletion of an unpleasant sound to simplify a cluster, and it’s one carried out by many, many people. Why bother with a /ft/ cluster when there’s no need to keep it around? It’s not like there’s another word, “Offen”, which this form of “often” could be confused with, and frankly, for speed, fluidity, and social reasons (in the US), the “offen” pronunciation is really a better choice.
Edit: OK, I misread this one completely in my anti-pedant rage. The author of the quoted article is actually _in favor_ of “offen” as the “proper” form, and I responded assuming that he, like so many others have, was arguing that “often” (with a /t/) is the only proper form. So, I’ve culled some of the anger from the post, and kept the phonology. Thanks, commenter!
Awry (pronounced as “aw-ree”, /’ɑɹi/ instead of “uh-rye” /ə’ɹaj/)
This word is a textbook example of why our writing system needs to be taken out behind the barn and dispatched as humanely as possible. Although “wry” is used for the proper /ɹaj/ pronunciation in the word “wry” (and only there), usually the “aw” digraph represents /ɑ/ (as in “claw”, “maw”, “awful”, “awkward”) and the “ry” represents /ɹi/ (as in “fury”, “worry”, “scurry”). I can understand the author feeling the need to state the proper pronunciation of the word, but his indignation at the thought that anybody could EVER think “awry” is pronounced “aw-ree” is just silly.
So, there’s a bit of phonological goodness wrung out of an otherwise dry and pedantic bit of prescriptivism. Which I am going to pronounce as “per-scriptivism” for the remainder of the day. Just to anger Justin Brown.
Tagged with Conventional Linguistics, Language Change, Phonetics and Phonology, Tirades, Words, Phrases, and Idioms | 3 Comments
Site Information
- About the author
- About this site (and the title text)
- Non-language-related posts
- Our Advertising Policy
- Our Pronoun Policy
- LinguisticMystic RSS Feed
Search the Site
Categories
- Computers and Software (20)
- Conventional Linguistics (108)
- Computational Linguistics (5)
- Dialects and Idiolects (6)
- Etymology (3)
- Language Acquisition (4)
- Language and Music (2)
- Language Change (11)
- Linguistic Anthropology (4)
- Phonetic Phriends (4)
- Phonetics and Phonology (31)
- Psycholinguistics (4)
- Sociolinguistics (22)
- Translation and Translation Theory (10)
- Using the IPA (1)
- Words, Phrases, and Idioms (30)
- Language and Thought (11)
- Language Censorship (3)
- Language Creation (6)
- Language Humor (28)
- Language Usage (79)
- Linguistic Mysticism (11)
- Notes (55)
- Reader Questions (3)
- Recommended Links (2)
Latest Non-linguistic Posts
Language Sites and Blogs
Linguistics and Language Resources
Links for Corrections
Unrelated-yet-awesome
Archives
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- April 2011
- June 2010
- March 2010
- September 2009
- March 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
Site features
- Entries RSS
- Powered by Wordpress
- Theme based on Vertigo Squared.
- Hosting by Joyent