On Thu 3 March 2005 23:48, Blake Swadling wrote: > On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 23:33 -0500, David P James wrote: > > On Wed 2 March 2005 23:10, John Hasler wrote: > > Come again? That "rule" doesn't apply to many of your examples! > > David > > OK up front I confess that i haven't been following this thread > closely (probably since the second post), but I think you are > assuming that everyone here is a yank. Not everyone in the English > speaking world pronounce things the way you folks do (i hazard a > guess that the majority don't) Blake, Considering I'm in Canada the above doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The only one I hear frequently here is "dee-fault" but many Americans seem to pronounce them all the way you do, which is a fascinating state of affairs. My father is English and he pronounces all of the below as I list them so I'm reasonably sure a good number of Brits do as well. > > > > default > > > > That's "d'fault" or "duh'fault" not "dee-fault' > > Ahh ... yes it is dee-fault > > > > silent > > > directly > > > > "dir-ectly" not "die-rectly" > > again yes it is die-rectly > > > > pronounce > > > > "pruh'nownce" or "praw'nownce" not "proh-nownce" > > once again i must say it is proh-nounce > > > > consonant > > > > "kon-son'ant" not "kohn-son'ant" or "kon-sohn-ant" > > > > > wrote > > > line > > > user > > > date > > > resent > > > > "r'zent" or "ruh'zent" not "ree-zent" > > once more you are incorrect, y'all might drop the 'ee' but we don't > > > > obeying > > > > "uh-bay-ing" or "aw-bay-ing" not "oh-bay-ing" > > and again .... it is oh-bay-ing > > > > request > > > > "r'kwest" or "ruh'kwest" not "ree-kwest" > > as per 'resent' > > > next you'll be telling us that it is "aluminum" ... check the > periodic table ppl. there is a second letter 'i' in there somewhere I do pronounce the 'i' sometimes (usually when referring to it in a chemistry context) but most Canadians do not, which is kind of annoying since in French it does get pronounced that way. > > if you re going to nit pick about pronunciation you should be a > little more careful. The same could be said of you and John when more than half of the initial list is in dispute, which was really my point - the rule only really holds in the limited 'vowel+consonant+e' case, and even there there are exceptions like 'some'. Cheers, -- David P James Ottawa, Ontario http://david.jamesnet.ca ICQ: #42891899, Jabber: davidpjames@jabber.org Noone isn't no one
Attachment:
pgpQGCCZQrDTs.pgp
Description: PGP signature