|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876 |
You guys are drifting towards one of my pet peeves: pronunciation. Where I live, people talk about getting a "per-MIT", when the proper pronunciation is "PER-mit". There are many such noun/verb pairs that get slaughtered/confused constantly. In general, the noun is accented on the first syllable, the verb not, as in:
RE-search vs. re-SEARCH
RE-cord vs. re-CORD
AL-ly vs. al-LY
Dislcaimers: This doesn't always work; I don't know the formal rules; just something I noticed; I'm sure someone else can come up with many more than I! :0)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
You guys are drifting towards one of my pet peeves: pronunciation. Where I live, people talk about getting a "per-MIT", when the proper pronunciation is "PER-mit". Is 'proper pronunciation' pretentious preposterous poppycock? Some would say so. Whether it is or not, it's certainly dependent entirely on how many people say it for how long. And it's regional and dialectic. There are many such noun/verb pairs that get slaughtered/confused constantly. In general, the noun is accented on the first syllable, the verb not Not in Antipodean or British English. One of my pet peeves is the Americanisation of Australian which includes placing the stress on the first syllable. In general we don't stress the first syllable of a two syllable noun but the second. In Aussiespeak we used to talk about deFENCE and offENCE (nouns). Now throuhg American Basketballese it has become DEfence and OFFence. We also tend mostly to stress the second syllable of verbs. We used to say deFEND (verb) but now it is becoming yankeefied to DEfend. However, there is no consistency and the rule you mention probably has so many exceptions as to be meaningless, even in American English. I haven't heard anyone, btw, Australian or American, say per-MIT for the noun, only for the verb. But it's all just a matter of usage over time. There is no inherently correct way. Language is very democratic - the majority rules eventually. English is dynamic not static, and dialectical not universal in pronunciation (or pronounciation as some people 'incorrectly' say it!).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
You guys with pet peeves, what do you feed them? I've looked in the pet food section of supermarkets, and even in pet specialty stores, such as PetSmart and no peeve food, neither dry nor wet. No peeve treats. No peeve chew toys (I gather from the way y'all talk about them that peeves like gnawing on things). Nothing. So what's the story here? And do you let them run free or do you keep them in cages? Again, it seems like if you let them run free, what with their propensity for chewing on things, that your furniture would end up in tatters.
Sign me,
Confused
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 876 |
Geez, Pook, in your world there are no rules at all, I guess! What is the point of any of this discussion if it's all relative? And I have never in my life heard anyone say "DE-fend", ever. As for "'proper pronunciation' pretentious preposterous poppycock", that's the best alliterative string I've seen in a long time!
LOL, Faldage! Mine live under my bed and whisper to me at night...
Check this out, I found it on another site, and it's great:
Olny srmat poelpe can raed tihs. I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in what oredr the ltteers in a word are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is that the first and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! :0)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Geez, Pook, in your world there are no rules at all, I guess! Read this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
As for "'proper pronunciation' pretentious preposterous poppycock", that's the best alliterative string I've seen in a long time! Why, thank you! Note I said "some people" - I wouldn't necessarily say it myself, I just said it because it popped into my head and was nice alliteration that I thought y'all word freaks might enjoy.  Geez, Pook, in your world there are no rules at all, I guess! What is the point of any of this discussion if it's all relative? I dint say that, but I just think that this particular passionately promoted pronunciation paradigm (there I go again, can't help myself!) is not really so cut and dried or consistent enough to be called a rule. I guess on a wider level what I'm saying is that grammar is primarily descriptive, rather than prescriptive. I'm not saying it's not prescriptive at all, it IS, but only for a certain period of time and in limited geographical areas. In essence, grammatical "rules" are merely descriptions of the way that the majority of speakers use the language at any given time.
Last edited by The Pook; 03/13/08 01:35 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067 |
Geez, Pook, in your world there are no rules at all, I guess! Read this. Yes, interesting. Thanks for that Faldage. I didn't read it before making my last post, but (insofar as I understand it after speed-reading it once) I think I agree with most of what he says there. I think that's what I was trying to say. I certainly agree that the "two extreme ones are both utterly insane." (ie extreme descriptivism v. extreme prescriptivism) He mentioned split infinitives as one of those hoary old chestnuts people like to argue over. I used to be one of those who insisted that "one ought to never split infinitives"  but have since been convinced by the Pookwife (who is an editor and indexer and has done courses in English usage) of the silliness of that extreme position. I think there are some instances where it is still grammatically undesirable to split an infinitive, but there are others where splitting it conveys better the meaning that you want to get across. The real question is not "have I split an infinitive" but "have I communicated the real meaning (and or emphasis) of what I want to say."
Last edited by The Pook; 03/13/08 01:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
And I have never in my life heard anyone say "DE-fend" Hoo boy, you must not have heard many Southerners ('scuse me, Pook and Olly--shoulda said U.S. Southerners!) talk, then.
The real question is not "have I split an infinitive" but "have I communicated the real meaning (and or emphasis) of what I want to say."
Mm. As someone (sorry I've forgotten who) pointed out not too long ago, it also depends on the circumstances: are you talking or writing, and is it formal or informal?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
Jackie, you're not going to hopelessly claim that you'd never (ever) split an infinitive in formal writing?!
-joe (the price of gas is likely to more than double) friday
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,810
Members9,187
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
373
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
