|
 |
’wh’ sound in American English | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| anthox Diglot Newbie United States Joined 6000 days ago 13 posts - 13 votes Speaks: English*, French Studies: Portuguese, Polish, Russian | Message 33 of 110 27 May 2009 at 4:18am | IP Logged | |||||
What do you mean, a good argument? Argument for what? I'm not maintaining any absolute position for or against the aspiration of 'wh', just telling you that where I'm from (NJ/NYC area) there is no 'ridiculous charade' required to distinguish 'well' and 'whale', which are not differentiated based on aspiration but rather by their internal vowel sounds. 'Wine' and 'whine,' of course, are complete homophones here. I don't see why this matters, though. Context or the mere fact that one is a noun and the other most commonly employed as a verb is enough to make confusing the two highly unlikely in any situation. Edited by anthox on 27 May 2009 at 4:21am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5731 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 34 of 110 27 May 2009 at 5:05am | IP Logged | |||||
|
<<The CORRECT pronunciation of 'wh' is with aspirition. What = "HWUT" - READ AN OLDER DICTIONARY. This is why I have no respect for Webster's and the like. It is a sad thing what is happening to my language. I hear people say "I hate when people say 'hwut' instead of 'wat.' They sound old." That's because that's the way it was pronounced for hundreds of years! That said..
Either pronunciation is acceptable in modern America. I prefer the aspirated version because, as I've said, it was correct for hundreds of years and I refuse to clip and mangle the English language. =) >> Why don't you speak Old English? Beowulf was the shiznit. Or maybe Chaucer was the epitome of correct English. But then again, The Bard wrote in a very different language, so maybe his predecessors were all wankers. Oh god, was that slang? I'm sorry. And I meant "God", not "god". Sorry. Do you still say "thou art"? If not, why not? Where exactly is your stake in the sand? And why? Thank G/god that James Joyce isn't the standard bearer. What? Dude. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5712 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 35 of 110 28 May 2009 at 6:25pm | IP Logged | |||||
This is an example of a bad and unintelligible argumentum ad hominem. You sound like you recieved debate tips of Kent Hovind. I do plan on learning old English and I have great respect for it but this is not about Old English. I speak correct, modern English and I'm trying to preserve it. Next thing you know we'll see 'conversate' and 'irregardless' in the dictionary. Wouldn't you like that? Edited by Rout on 28 May 2009 at 7:12pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5712 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 36 of 110 28 May 2009 at 6:35pm | IP Logged | |||||
I am maintaining a definitive and absolute stance on this. I haven't seen anyone with such a strong conviction that he's argued the opposite position yet. Listen, if you say 'wut' instead of 'what' then that's fine, so don't feel bad; it's just not correct. Edited by Rout on 28 May 2009 at 6:59pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5731 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 37 of 110 28 May 2009 at 7:51pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
<<...but this is not about Old English.>>
Au contraire, mein Freund. The transition from Old English through middle to modern English didn't happen as the result of some planned process. More-or-less random changes in people's usage accumulated until it became convenient to distinguish the language used in one period from another. But you apparently think that such changes that happened long ago result in correct English, while similar changes that happen today don't. Why? If not pronouncing the 'h' in 'what' is wrong, certainly using 'you' in place of 'thou' is a much greater error. Do you still say 'thou'? If not, why not? And pointing to some preferred dictionary is ridiculous. If we had the equivalent of Websters from the days of Beowulf and Chaucer and Shakespeare, each would indicate that the others, and you, were using the language incorrectly. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| SamD Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 6659 days ago 823 posts - 987 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, French Studies: Portuguese, Norwegian | Message 38 of 110 28 May 2009 at 8:16pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
I'm an adult native speaker of English and I live in Ohio. I could probably count the number of times I've heard an aspirated "wh" in my life.
If you are learning English as a second language, it seems very, very unlikely that you will be criticized or stand out if you don't aspirate the "wh" sound. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5712 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 39 of 110 28 May 2009 at 8:17pm | IP Logged | |||||
Modern English is more the convergence of multiple languages to form a new language more than 'changes' that happened long ago. If you want to make up your own language then go ahead, but don't call it English and expect it to be correct. I do use 'thou,' there is nothing incorrect about it. I don't know anyone here intimately so of course I do not use it. It's a word of preference so why would its unuse be erroneous? It simply is a second person singular pronoun used with someone you know intimately. Bad argument. English dictionaries did not exist during the lives of Chaucer and Shakespeare. I believe you'll find that during their times there was no uniform spelling of any words, thus, no incorrect spellings. Sometimes the same word was spelled differently in the same sentence. We have now developed a mostly uniform and consistent, although not in a phonetic sense, standard of spelling and speech and we should uphold it as the law. That's my personal belief, and as I've said before, I have made a logical and definitive stance. Edited by Rout on 28 May 2009 at 8:19pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5712 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 40 of 110 28 May 2009 at 8:28pm | IP Logged | |||||
That's to say 'You might not be criticized or corrected' with your approach, whereas my argument [aspirated 'what'] is you won't be criticized or corrected because what you say in this manner is not incorrect to anyone, in any matter, at any time. win - when, wine - whine, which - witch. There is a difference. ;) 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
