Anybody who knows me more than in passing, knows I have no love of or respect for the current orthography of English. English went through a number of major changes starting in the Early Middle English period (roughly 1100 CE) and ending with the double whammy of the great vowel shift in the Late Middle English and the early Modern English periods and the invention of the printing press. The great vowel shift was responsible for given us the reassignment of cardinal vowel values (a, e, i, o, u) from those in many European languages to those which we have to teach our children when they learn to spell. Especially pernicious are the so-called long vowels, three of which are diphthongs, one of which is a triphthong, and finaly one of which is an actual long vowel, (though it is not quantity that distinguishes it from its short counterpart but quality): (ā /eɪ/, ē /i:/, ī /aɪ/, ō /oʊ/, ū /jʊw/). The part about the printing is that printing was introduced to England at the time when great changes in the pronunciation and grammar of the language were taking place. Also, there is a conservative tendency in spelling to preserve etymological features even after phones have changed drastically. Things like the final e, which was still pronounced as a reduced vowel or schwa in the Middle English period, that partially marked what remained of the Old English case system, became in Modern English a kind of indicator of the pronunciation of the vowel in the previous syllable, e.g., cod, code. Then there are letters that were not being pronounced, but were written because there was a desire to spell things in such a way as to indicate their etymological origin in Latin, e.g., the c in perfect. When we borrowed the French word parfit (at the time, the final t was pronounced), there was no c in it, but soon the spelling became perfect, but still pronounced parfit, but nowadays the c is pronounced. Another favorite of mine is admiral. Here the d not only was not pronounced when the word was borrowed, but is unetymological as the word is ultimately the Arabic (cognate with our word emir). Folks with little Latin and less Greek, assumed that amiral was based on a Latin word, and since they knew that words coming in from French usually lacked the etymological d in the prefix ad- (e.g., aventure, adventire), they stuck one in where it did not belong, and now it is pronounced because there has been a tendency towards pronounced letters that were silent earlier, e.g., often is now commonly pronounced with the t, so much so that I am occasionally corrected when I use the older, preferred pronunciation without the t.

D'ac, but um, are you ranting, raving, elaborating? Did you want to discuss a particular point?

With your first sentence being: Anybody who knows me more than in passing, knows I have no love of or respect for the current orthography of English. I got the feeling there was going to be a "however" at the end of your post.

It was all interesting though. As an aside, can you tell me how you would pronounce the vowel sounds you presented; (ā /eɪ/, ē /i:/, ī /aɪ/, ō /oʊ/, ū /jʊw/). A couple of word examples would be appreciated since regional pronunciations can skew the example set.

I'm afraid jim meant those parenthetical sounds to be explicit, presented in IPA notation as they are. unfortunately, they leave many of us gasping for breath. International Phonetic Alphabet

I got the feeling there was going to be a "however" at the end of your post.

Yeah, but I never got around to the however. I just ran out of steam.

(ā /eɪ/, ē /i:/, ī /aɪ/, ō /oʊ/, ū /jʊw/). A couple of word examples would be appreciated since regional pronunciations can skew the example set.

Sure, here's a table:

Traditional representation | IPA pronunciation | example word:

ā /eɪ/ bait
ē /i:/ beet
ī /aɪ/ byte
ō /oʊ/ boat
ū /jʊw/ butte

those parenthetical sounds to be explicit, presented in IPA notation as they are.

Sorry. In my defense, I did add the traditional vowels with macrons to represent the sounds, too.

unfortunately, they leave many of us gasping for breath.

Yes, it is annoying. I feel the same way when people start talking about sports or autos.

Reviewing the sequence, I think that the final one, the long u (ū), is probably better transcribed as /jʊ:/. (So. it would be a diphthong.)

In your initial post you put three things up: the great vowel shift, printing, which more or less coïndided with that shift and etymologizing which tends to support conservativeness in spelling.

Vowel shift. They happened all the time through history. Gradually and at times explosively.
The dawn of printing. Do you mean that the introduction of printing made people more aware of language, grammar, phonology, syntax ? Was there clear a connection ?
The etymologizing of... 'The tendency to preserve etymological features even after phones have changed drastically' means pronunciation and written word did not develop completely synchronic ? And in remote parts of a language region did and do not some old pronunciations stay on, just because they were less touched by the sweep of time?
Dialects preserve old sounds.

Do you think internet and the worldwide hyperactive migration of people causes a sort of explosive vowel shift? I know there is a far greater difference in grammar and sound between me and youngsters today then there was between me and my grandparents.

Any comparison between the introduction of printing and the internet?

Vowel shift. They happened all the time through history. Gradually and at times explosively.

Yes, but the real thing in English spelling's case is the combo of a radical change in phonology with a preservation of the old orthography. English is possibly the onlymajor European language to have not gone through a orthography reform in 600 or so years.

The dawn of printing. Do you mean that the introduction of printing made people more aware of language, grammar, phonology, syntax ? Was there clear a connection ?

The introduction of printing led to a standardization of spelling and an rise in literacy.

The etymologizing of... 'The tendency to preserve etymological features even after phones have changed drastically' means pronunciation and written word did not develop completely synchronic ? And in remote parts of a language region did and do not some old pronunciations stay on, just because they were less touched by the sweep of time?

Sometimes remote areas preserve archaic features that have been lost in central areas, but not always. Also, some work I've seen suggests that not all change is constant. Some linguists have used an idea from evolutionary biology in historical linguistics, that of punctuated equilibriums.

Dialects preserve old sounds.

Sometimes, but also sometimes dialects diverge while the standard language remains more conservative owing to spelling, literature, etc. especially, if like so many European dialects a standardized orthography is not available for the dialect.

*sigh* Don't tell Fal, but it's one of my pet peeves. Many seem to feel that the "t" adds an aura of sophistication and education. When it comes up with students (or I just ramble into my peeve for some reason...), I always bring up "soften" and ask if they've ever heard someone pronounce the "t" in that word. I haven't yet been told that it's been heard. Then I get to teach them "oft", so like "soft", but an oft ignored word all on its own.

Students often complain that Spanish is, get this, "harder than English". Oy. It's obvious they don't know English well (they really don't). But Spanish vowels make learning the language so much easier, because there is only the one set, no long and short. In fact, once they are learned, one can read anything in Spanish, whether one understands it or not, and pronounce every word correctly. Try that in English!

Bran asks, "Do you think internet and the worldwide hyperactive migration of people causes a sort of explosive vowel shift? I know there is a far greater difference in grammar and sound between me and youngsters today then there was between me and my grandparents."

I think this is an interesting question; how often do you suppose this sort of question was asked *while the Great Vowel Shift was actually happening!
-joe (re-asking the unanswered) friday

There's nothing wrong with peeves as long as you remain in control. That is one of the things that Nunc was showing us how to do in his opening post.

And as far as vowel shifts go, there's one happening right now. It's called the Northern Urban Chain Shift. there's a couple of others going on, too. There's a Southern Vowel Shift and a Western Vowel Shift in Northern Arizona. YCLTU.

*sigh* Don't tell Fal, but it's one of my pet peeves.

As Faldo sez, it's OK to have pet peeves. We all do have them., but at some point the language just moves on, and we older speakers are left behind. I collect 19th century (and earlier) usage books and prescriptive grammars. It is fun to see what were the hot pet peeves of many of their authors. To jeopardize is a good example: turns out we should use the verb to jeopard. And, that's why, while it does annoy me when people say things like "To air is human" rather than "to err is human", I just chuckle silently to myself and wonder how language changes in spite of what some of its speakers consciously desire.

Students often complain that Spanish is, get this, "harder than English". Oy. It's obvious they don't know English well (they really don't).

Well, the value of vowels in English is different from most other languages that use the Latin alphabet. This is also complicated by the fact that some of the terminology used by (traditional) grammarians of English is just plain wrong. English does not have phonemic lengthening of vowels. period. Old English did distinguish between long and short vowels (as do German and Dutch), but the long vowels in Old English had the same value as their short corresponding vowels. Not so in English. What we call long vowels are mostly not even vowels, but diphthongs.

But Spanish vowels make learning the language so much easier, because there is only the one set, no long and short. In fact, once they are learned, one can read anything in Spanish, whether one understands it or not, and pronounce every word correctly. Try that in English!

That's what I'm on about. We spend an inordinate amount of time teaching kids how to read because we have a terrible orthography for English. (Mind you, it's not as bad as some; I am currently learning Japanese, and their whole writing system is really much worse.) The down-side to having a sound [no pun intended] phonemic spelling system is, you do not have a need for spelling bees. The only spelling mistakes I've seen in (Mexican) Spanish are confusion of intervocalic b and v *dever or deber 'to owe'.

We are so in sync with this, zmjezhd! Perhaps the inventor(s) of Esperanto had that in mind, too.

Other spelling errors arise from dialectical speech. For example, some may write pa for para, or invent a contraction like nay for no hay. I see these in home speakers when they write essays. My non-home speakers make totally different mistakes, such as "Yo lata ir al cine." These are sometimes quite baffling to me, and I have to do a word-for-word literal translation to catch them, and say them out loud as well, and sometimes check a dictionary. I find them very amusing on a boring day... :0)

"Yo lata ir al cine."

I had not heard that before. Spanish latir is in the dictionary in Mexican Spanish use for gustar link).

Here's what the student wants to say:

I CAN go to the movie theater.

Here's what they write, and what it really means:

Yo lata ir al cine. = I (tin)can go to the movie theater...

What has happened: Student wants to say "I can", looks up "can" in the dictionary, writes down first word seen, ignoring indication that this is a noun...

But latir (literally 'to beat, pulse') is an auxiliary verb in Chilean and Mexican Spanish. Are these students who speak Spanish at home or English-speaking students? I have seen the sort of error, you're talking about, but I'm wondering if the Spanish-speaking students are just using an idiomatic construction. While lata is a noun for 'tin can", it is also the ;present subjunctive form of latir. As I said, I was not familiar with the form, and it's been many years since I studied Spanish, but googling around for lata plus infinitive (e.g., hablar, ir, etc.) gets many hits, and not all of them are from non-native speakers.

the long u (ū), is probably better transcribed as /jʊ:/. (So. it would be a diphthong.) Nah, it just has two syllables!

I am tutoring a boy, approx. 11 years old, who is from Liberia (where English is the official language). He has been in the States four years, he says. I have been interested to note that he offen will say a word that ends in -ed as two syllables even when it is normally pronounced here in one. As in, They look-ed across the street.

In some dialects of Spanish the differences between B and V in all situations are non-existent. When spelling it is common to say, e.g., "V vaca" or "B boca", pronounced respectively "bay bahkah' and "bay bohkah". The lovely AnnaS and I have a running joke that we drag out every time we drive through Victor, NY, based on a personal experience of AS when she was asked by a native Spanish speaker "Is that bay as in Victor or bay as in Habana?"

"Is that bay as in Victor or bay as in Habana?"

And for the curious, the phoneme in boca and vaca is not the same as the b or v in English. It is a voiced bilabial fricative /β/ and neither a voiced labio-dental fricative /v/ or a voiced bilabial stop /b/. (It is the voiced counterpart of the f in Japanese futon, /ɸ/.

Depending on your particular dialect of Spanish. In some it is only the intervocalic B/V that is pronounced as Nunc describes. Initial B/V is pronounced much like our initial B. What makes the "bay as in Victor..." line particularly funny is that the V is pronounced like our B and the B (that's how they spell Havana in Spanish) is pronounced something like our V.

that whole b/v thing gives singers fits...

and I'm one who pronounces an h at the beginning of words such as white, and when. I get a lot of crap for that.

this is one of the best threads eber.

who pronounces an h at the beginning of words such as white

The whine-wine merger (link) is one of many interesting phonological changes to have occurred to English over the past millennium or so. I take it you are from somewhere in the NE of the USA. (I see the Vermont on your profile, but you could've moved.) Some wh do not go back to Old English hw (early PIE *kw-), such as whole (< OE hāl). How about some of the wh-word that lost their labelization early on, such as who? I assume your dialect hasn't gone through the cot-caught or Mary-merry-marry mergers yet either ...

I was born in South Dakota, and lived on the Great Plains for the first 23 years of my life. since, then I've been in Vermont(25 years). whole I say hole, who I say hoo. and cot-caught are definitely two different pronunciations, but I'm not so sure about the Marys...

Oho! I say hoo too. I hear it like that also when English people say 'who'. But there's another Spanish sound that causes me anyway problems enough: zarzuela, cabeça, corazon. Even more complicated than the Englis ththt-s.
I suppose the Spanish th-sounds are a bit different from the English?

In some parts of Spain, z and c before i and e are /θ/, the same as English. It's called ceceo.

You knew I'd get in on this...

There are regional variations, as noted. In "standard" Spanish, there exists no sound correspondent to a "z" in English. It is pronounced as an "s".

B/V: Same sound. Often they are called "v chica" and "b grande", in which, of course, the first letters send the same, hence the need for distinction.

"Is that bay as in Victor or bay as in Habana?" - now THAT is funny!

I take crap for my "wh" pronunciation, too. I teach in an urban high school. They even try to "trick" me into saying words such as "whale" so they can have a laugh. Sometimes I indulge them... ;0)

Yes I know you are the hispañola ;~) Do you really pronounce Belazques? I always did that wrong then. S and Z I did right, like in Velazques we pronounce two times S.
But I was concerned with that th-as in-the sound, which is a real trial for the not anglo-born. (or Spanish)

th-as in-the sound

Not all sibilants are lisped in Castillian. As has been pointed out only the graphemes c and z before front vowels, e and i. Also, I voice the dental fricative in English the /ðə/. The Spanish phoneme is actually voiceless (as in English thin /'θɪn/).

Lovely words, "the lisping sibilants " that are phonemes. Worthy of LLewis Carol. Alright, I will stop talking about mi corathon when it comes from the heart. BTW. Argentinian Spanish has the speciality of softening by adding a Z to the double ll changing Guillermo (Guijermo) into Guizjermo and such. I lack the phenomel phenomenal (?) expertise.

Argentinian Spanish has the speciality of softening by adding a Z to the double ll changing Guillermo (Guijermo) into Guizjermo and such.

How the different varieties of Spanish pronounce the phoneme represented by ll is called yeísmo (link). Varieties are /j/ (as the y in English you), /ʒ/ (as j in French jour), /dʒ/ (as j or dg in English judge). Then there is lleísmo where the ll is pronounced /ʎ/ (as gl in Italian gli).

I too pronounce the "H" in words such as "whether" (by pronunciation distinguished from "weather")and I was born and raised in New York. I don't get a lot of comments about this. There are many New Yorkers who don't speak in "Brooklynese" and realize that "Long Island" are two words not one.

I too pronounce the "H" in words such as "whether" (by pronunciation distinguished from "weather")and I was born and raised in New York. I don't get a lot of comments about this. There are many New Yorkers who don't speak in "Brooklynese" and realize that "Long Island" are two words not one.
Heck, yeah! When is not wen; also, whelp is NOT welp, which should be welt anyway.
As to Long Island, don't most New Yohkahs (speaking of non-rhotics...oh yeah, that was the other thread) kind of put two gees in there? A regular one on the end of Long but adding one onto the next? To me it sounds like they're saying Long GUYland.