39 messages over 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Next >>
Retinend Triglot Senior Member SpainRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4311 days ago 283 posts - 557 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish Studies: Arabic (Written), French
| Message 1 of 39 21 June 2014 at 8:25am | IP Logged |
Yesterday I had a conversation in Spanish in which Shakespeare's name was mentioned. The
Spanish person used the Spanish version of the name, which transforms it almost
unrecognisably since both the "sh" and the "ks" are lost to just "s". When I mentioned
him, I completely dropped my Spanish accent and pronounced the name "properly," but is
this the right thing to do? In other words, just because you know the language that a loan
word comes from, is it fine to launch into the accent of that language for those specific
syllables? Is it pretentious?
1 person has voted this message useful
| Cabaire Senior Member Germany Joined 5602 days ago 725 posts - 1352 votes
| Message 2 of 39 21 June 2014 at 9:03am | IP Logged |
I would say, yes it is pretentious, especially if the language has an accepted native way of pronunciation. If you say in Englisch "This man comes from München", it would be an error, because the city is called Munich in English.
I caused one time confusion, because I pronounced Hans Christian Andersen the Danish way, and every German found this ridiculous.
When one listens to the audio book "Harry Potter y la piedra filosofal" the speaker changes into a surprisingly original oxford accent every time a proper name is mentioned, and this destroys the flow of the Spanish sentences and is very annoying in my ears.
There is a system of apartheit that it is more accepted and prestigious to pronounce English loanwords in an original way, but the more exotic the language, the less it is accepted to do this. Even French has lost this highest status. Where I live, the people buy f.e. ['golewa] cigarettes, to say the French Gauloises correctly would sound stilted.
PS. This reminds me a thread, where it was mentioned that the Chinese call the bard Wēilián Shāshìbĭyà :-)
Edited by Cabaire on 21 June 2014 at 10:46am
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7159 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish
| Message 3 of 39 21 June 2014 at 11:48am | IP Logged |
For me in some situations it is indeed pretentious, however in other situations I think
that it communicates things better.
For words in English that have been practically accepted in a "corrupted" form, you
risk also confusing your audience in the name of being true to the root (e.g. it's
"goulash" not gulyás or even gulyásleves). On the other hand, if dealing
with people who are informed or more comfortable in using the native language that is
the source of the loanword, then it may facilitate communication better to use the
original form. For example pronouncing mućkalica (a kind of Serbian pork and
pepper stew) like "muck-ah-lick-ah" as looking at it with an English lens rather than
something like "mooch-ka-leet-sa" which is closer to the "proper" BCMS/SC pronunciation
would probably confuse the audience (especially if they were ex-Yugoslavs) and/or make
you look a little silly/culturally ignorant.
On a related note, see also http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?
TID=17886&PN=5777&TPN=1 ("Renaming the cities of other countries...") and http://how-
to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8472&PN= 93&TPN=1 ("Stereotypes
Affecting Languages"). This second thread struck a nerve with me because the OP assumed
maliciousness or maybe even racism on the part of those who mispronounced native words
and/or adopted "mispronunciatıons" of native terms)
Edited by Chung on 21 June 2014 at 11:55am
2 persons have voted this message useful
| tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4710 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish
| Message 4 of 39 21 June 2014 at 11:52am | IP Logged |
I agree with Chung. If the word is a recent loan that is still to be integrated, you can
use the English pronunciation - if it's an accepted loanword, you need to use the
nativized pronunciation (e.g. computer in Dutch should have an "uu" sound not a "you"
sound).
1 person has voted this message useful
| Alphathon Groupie Scotland Joined 4183 days ago 60 posts - 104 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German, Scottish Gaelic
| Message 5 of 39 21 June 2014 at 4:11pm | IP Logged |
Names (of people) may be a special case though as they aren't really loans per se. Just as names aren't "translated" (e.g. Alejandro doesn't become Alexander), I feel that, barring any differences in accent, the name should probably remain intact.
Retinend wrote:
The Spanish person used the Spanish version of [Shakespeare's] name, which transforms it almost unrecognisably since both the "sh" and the "ks" are lost to just "s". |
|
|
Does Spanish feature /ʃ/ or /ks/? If not, pronouncing them both as /s/ isn't really any different than a modern RP speaker not pronouncing the /ɹ/ at the end - i.e. it's a feature of the accent.
Of course, if the person decides to adopt a localised name for whatever reason (e.g. Dr. Seuss adopting the pronunciation that rhymes with deuce rather than the standard German pronunciation) that's another matter altogether.
1 person has voted this message useful
| soclydeza85 Senior Member United States Joined 3910 days ago 357 posts - 502 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German, French
| Message 6 of 39 21 June 2014 at 4:49pm | IP Logged |
It used to really bother me when I'd watch the news (in America) and the reporter, who was Latin American, spoke with a perfectly natural American English accent but then jumped into a Latin American Spanish accent real quickly when saying names or places.
I guess there is no right or wrong, but my idea is to pronounce the word/name/place as close as possible to its how it's said in its native language but using the phonology of the language I am speaking (unless there is an English equivalent, such as the Munich vs München example).
1 person has voted this message useful
| Retinend Triglot Senior Member SpainRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4311 days ago 283 posts - 557 votes Speaks: English*, German, Spanish Studies: Arabic (Written), French
| Message 7 of 39 21 June 2014 at 5:55pm | IP Logged |
Alphathon wrote:
Names (of people) may be a special case though as they aren't really loans per se. Just as names aren't "translated" (e.g. Alejandro doesn't become
Alexander), I feel that, barring any differences in accent, the name should probably remain intact. |
|
|
..."BARRING any differences in accent?" Whose accent? Obviously there's "a difference of accent" between myself (with my native English accent) and this Spanish person, but
this is an odd way of putting it, and I don't see your point with it. And since Spanish phonology doesn't have the sh or ks sounds, it's automatically not possible for the name
to "remain intact" (at least it wasn't immediately obvious to me what he meant when I heard his rendering). I, obviously, can keep it intact, but the question is about whether
I should.
Though proper names they may not be strictly loan words, I wanted to be inclusive with the title.
Quote:
Does Spanish feature /ʃ/ or /ks/? If not, pronouncing them both as /s/ isn't really any different than a modern RP speaker not pronouncing the /ɹ/ at the end - i.e. it's
a feature of the accent. |
|
|
There's no /ɹ/ in the pronunciation of "Shakespeare."
1 person has voted this message useful
| Elenia Diglot Senior Member United Kingdom lilyonlife.blog Joined 3859 days ago 239 posts - 327 votes Speaks: English*, French Studies: German, Swedish, Esperanto
| Message 8 of 39 21 June 2014 at 6:19pm | IP Logged |
Retinend wrote:
Alphathon wrote:
Names (of people) may be a special case though as
they aren't really loans per se. Just as names aren't "translated" (e.g.
Alejandro doesn't become
Alexander), I feel that, barring any differences in accent, the name should
probably remain intact. |
|
|
..."BARRING any differences in accent?" Whose accent? Obviously there's "a difference
of accent" between myself (with my native English accent) and this Spanish person, but
this is an odd way of putting it, and I don't see your point with it. And since Spanish
phonology doesn't have the sh or ks sounds, it's automatically not possible for the
name
to "remain intact" (at least it wasn't immediately obvious to me what he meant when I
heard his rendering). I, obviously, can keep it intact, but the question is about
whether
I should.
|
|
|
French people have a tendency to change names to make them sound more French. For
example, Leonardo da Vinci is known in France as Léonard de Vinci (with the 'c' being
pronounced as an 's'). His surname remains somewhat 'intact' but his forename is
changed, and 'da' becomes 'de'. I'm not sure if this kind of change is what Alphathon
was talking about, but it's what comes immediately to my mind.
As to whether you should, I think that just depends on how you feel adjusting your
pronunciation for one word mid-sentence. In theory, I'd rather pronounce English proper
names the English way (although not necessarily loanwords), but in practice I find it a
little difficult to do, and I get tongue tied and confused if I try.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
This discussion contains 39 messages over 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Next >>
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.4551 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|