|
 |
’wh’ sound in American English | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5734 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 49 of 110 28 May 2009 at 11:28pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
<<Once more, I speak modern English so a better comparison might be with me and modern authors...>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English "Modern English is the form of the English language spoken since the Great Vowel Shift, completed in roughly 1550. Despite some differences in vocabulary, texts from the early 17th century, such as the works of William Shakespeare and the King James Bible, are considered to be in Modern English, or more specifically, are referred to as using Early Modern English." Your writing is nothing like that of Shakespeare or the KJB. Why do insist upon writing such incorrect doggerel? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5715 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 50 of 110 28 May 2009 at 11:28pm | IP Logged | |||||
??? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5715 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 51 of 110 28 May 2009 at 11:30pm | IP Logged | |||||
Have you heard Williarm Shakespeare speak? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5734 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 52 of 110 28 May 2009 at 11:39pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
<<Have you heard Williarm Shakespeare speak? >>
Er, no. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5734 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 53 of 110 28 May 2009 at 11:53pm | IP Logged | |||||
Its ok, I'll write slowly. You state that we have a mostly uniform standard of speech, except in a phonetic sense. I should really just stop right there. You also claim that your preferred pronunciation of 'what' is the correct one, because an unnamed dictionary says so. Finally, you claim this is logical. If our standards are "mostly uniform", there must be valid exceptions. You give no reason to believe the h-less pronunciation of 'what' doesn't fall into this category. Ergo, FAIL. Your claim is not logical. Nevertheless, if we have a standard of speech that doesn't define that speech in a phonetic sense, in what way is it logical to argue about the pronunciation of a word? Ergo, FAIL. Your claim is not logical. In summary, FAIL. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5734 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 54 of 110 29 May 2009 at 12:02am | IP Logged | |||||
|
<<The CORRECT pronunciation of 'wh' is with aspirition.>>
<<The English language has done most of its evolution via spelling reforms, media, etc. and we have now reached a mostly uniform way of speaking and writing, so why complicate it Webster?>> If we have a *mostly* uniform way of speaking, there must be acceptable variation. But on the basis of nothing, you deny that unaspirated-wh in 'what' is such a variation. Support your argument. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| rapp Senior Member United States Joined 5734 days ago 129 posts - 204 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Esperanto, Spanish | Message 55 of 110 29 May 2009 at 12:14am | IP Logged | |||||
Prove your claim. According to this: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/what there are multiple acceptable pronunciations, including with an unvoiced 'h'. Also this: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/what And this: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=90067&dict=CA LD And this: http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/what.html Quite simply, you're wrong. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Rout Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5715 days ago 326 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish Studies: Hindi | Message 56 of 110 29 May 2009 at 7:04am | IP Logged | |||||
|
It took me a while to make sense of all your posts and decipher your argument since you refuse to make one terse reply at a time in preference to hap hazard tergiversation. I will summarize my argument first.
1. 'What' should be pronounced phonetically because it has been for hundreds of years therefore it is correct in that it is sanctioned by custom and educated usage. 2. Because this word is phonetic it should stay that way. Non-phonetic loanwords and whatnot should not disqualify it as such. 3. There is no logical reason to pronounce it any other way and no argument why I shouldn't. In short, it is not and never has been incorrect, whereas unaspiration of the same phoneme has been in the past. 4. It distinguishes itself from being a homophone and therefore is less confusing. I could say 'and he sips his glass of fish' and figure out that the word 'wine' was what was intended through the context but why would I want to? No word that starts with 'wh' is a homophone, plain and simple. 5. Consistency of usage is on my side. 'who' is aspirated and it is my hope to preserve this word as well as all other 'wh' words. This is what seems to be your argument: 1. Past evolution of the English language allows for change, therefore change is not bad, therefore 'what' should be pronounced 'wut' because Paris Hilton and everyone I've met does. If you find that an unfavorable summary then please feel free to revise it in a short and concise outline. Replies to your insensate remarks: 1. The dictionary I have that has only the transliteration 'hwut' is the New American Webster dictionary I believe from around the 60's. I have it buried in some other books but I could get you a date if you require it to accredit my argument. If you wanted the name all you had to do was ask. 2. You keep equivocating by stating that Shakespeare's Elizabethan poetic literary English usage has something to do with my modern prosaic spoken English which somehow has something to do with 'wut' being correct. If anything this argument proves my stance more than yours, albeit vaguely. As I have stated, older English forms were spelled infinitely more phonetically than modern English and I have yet to see a variation of that the English word 'what.' 3. Because I have conviction in my stance you feel the need to attack me because you hold an undecided and illogical stance that 'wat' is correct just because you say so with absolutely no evidence that the usage is correct. Your only intent and stratagem seems to be to discredit not my argument but me. This has got to be the least tactful and crafty artifice used during debate and I will not argue any further except on the point that I intend to prove. 'what' is the correct pronunciation of 'what.' 4. You continually cite wikipedia articles that I could have written myself. As a matter of fact I took the liberty of editing the article stating that Shakespeare spoke modern English. Thank you. Forgive me if I've missed anything. Edited by Rout on 29 May 2009 at 7:11am 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. |
