Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:27:18 -, Nick Sabalausky wrote: But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious It seems Spanish to me ;) "Get your yappy 'perro' off my leg!" LOL :) R -- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation(was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:14:30PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "H. S. Teoh" wrote in message > news:mailman.278.1331251506.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... [...] > I've heared that in countries like China which have a tonal language, > the percentage of people with "perfect pitch" is incredibly high - > something like 90-99%. Whereas in other places, like the US, it's > *way* below half the population (something like 10%, IIRC). [...] I'm not sure if there's a direct correlation though... because Chinese tones are not pitch-perfect; they are relative to a reference pitch which differs from person to person. T -- The most powerful one-line C program: #include "/dev/tty" -- IOCCC
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 01:12:20PM +1300, James Miller wrote: [...] > For a university project, I had to do a group assignment building a > psycholinguistic demo platform for a textbook. While it was more > focused on how the brain interprets language (very interesting in > itself), we spent a lot of time talking to a linguistics professor, > and he can produce the strangest sounds! I assume its because he's > studied how these sounds get made so well that he can make them > himself, despite not speaking the languages the sounds originate from. [...] I know someone who is studying linguistics, and she told us that in one phonology class, they were taught how to make all kinds of strange sounds. I assume that must be part and parcel of being a linguist. :-) T -- It's amazing how careful choice of punctuation can leave you hanging:
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation(was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
"James Miller" wrote in message news:mailman.282.1331251951.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > For a university project, I had to do a group assignment building a > psycholinguistic demo platform for a textbook. While it was more > focused on how the brain interprets language (very interesting in > itself), we spent a lot of time talking to a linguistics professor, > and he can produce the strangest sounds! lol, I love how you worded that :) Speaking of strange human-produced [vocal] sounds, I've always wished I could do *half* of what Michael Winslow can do ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Winslow ).
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation(was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
"H. S. Teoh" wrote in message news:mailman.278.1331251506.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > The problem with learning by 'hearing' is that, past a certain age, you > lose the sensitivity to certain sound distinctions that are not present > in your mother tongue. I suppose it's a sort of instinctive > "optimization" done by your brain: if a certain set of sound differences > don't matter, then there's no need to retain the extra resources to > distinguish between them. Lump them all together and treat them as the > same sound for higher efficiency. > Hmm, I don't doubt that theory. > English speakers trying to learn Chinese, for example, have an > incredible difficulty in hearing the "tones" -- because there is simply > not such a distinction made in English that saying something in a > different tone can *completely* change the meaning. I've heared that in countries like China which have a tonal language, the percentage of people with "perfect pitch" is incredibly high - something like 90-99%. Whereas in other places, like the US, it's *way* below half the population (something like 10%, IIRC). > Korean speakers > learning English, OTOH, have the hardest time telling the difference > between "fork" and "pork" -- because in Korean, "p" and "f" are not > distinguished. They just don't hear it, or if they do, they can't > reliably reproduce it. (Makes for hilarious dinner conversations -- > "please pass the [fp]ork".) > Fun :)
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On 9 March 2012 12:45, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "Nick Sabalausky" wrote in message > news:jjavf2$1v3p$1...@digitalmars.com... >> "James Miller" wrote in message >> news:mailman.235.1331210469.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >>>On 9 March 2012 01:23, Stewart Gordon wrote: I'm finding it hard to figure how someone would pronounce the "o" and "u" in "colour" separately. >> >> I would imagine it'd be like "kuh-lore". >> >>>Being British means that I do notice the differences in pronunciation, >>>I've pretty much done the opposite to Reagan, gone from England to NZ. >>>I tend to get frustrated when I can't even correct pronunciation >>>because nobody can hear the difference! >> >> I have a little extra insight into this as my mom is a speech/language >> pathologist: >> >> As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference often >> doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't necessarily give >> them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think the right thing to do, >> at least in cases where it actually matters, is to instruct them on the >> actual mouth movements involved. Then they can "feel" the difference, and >> start to hear themselves making the different sound. "Hearing" it can >> naturally follow from that. >> > > Out of curiosity, I just asked her about this and she said that "hearing" it > *does* typically come first, so I guess I was wrong about that. But she did > say that failing that, yea, bringing in instruction on the mouth movements > can be a reasonable next step as it brings other senses into play. For a university project, I had to do a group assignment building a psycholinguistic demo platform for a textbook. While it was more focused on how the brain interprets language (very interesting in itself), we spent a lot of time talking to a linguistics professor, and he can produce the strangest sounds! I assume its because he's studied how these sounds get made so well that he can make them himself, despite not speaking the languages the sounds originate from. -- James Miller
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 06:45:34PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "Nick Sabalausky" wrote in message > news:jjavf2$1v3p$1...@digitalmars.com... [...] > > I have a little extra insight into this as my mom is a > > speech/language pathologist: > > > > As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference > > often doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't > > necessarily give them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think > > the right thing to do, at least in cases where it actually matters, > > is to instruct them on the actual mouth movements involved. Then > > they can "feel" the difference, and start to hear themselves making > > the different sound. "Hearing" it can naturally follow from that. > > > > Out of curiosity, I just asked her about this and she said that > "hearing" it *does* typically come first, so I guess I was wrong about > that. But she did say that failing that, yea, bringing in instruction > on the mouth movements can be a reasonable next step as it brings > other senses into play. [...] The problem with learning by 'hearing' is that, past a certain age, you lose the sensitivity to certain sound distinctions that are not present in your mother tongue. I suppose it's a sort of instinctive "optimization" done by your brain: if a certain set of sound differences don't matter, then there's no need to retain the extra resources to distinguish between them. Lump them all together and treat them as the same sound for higher efficiency. English speakers trying to learn Chinese, for example, have an incredible difficulty in hearing the "tones" -- because there is simply not such a distinction made in English that saying something in a different tone can *completely* change the meaning. Korean speakers learning English, OTOH, have the hardest time telling the difference between "fork" and "pork" -- because in Korean, "p" and "f" are not distinguished. They just don't hear it, or if they do, they can't reliably reproduce it. (Makes for hilarious dinner conversations -- "please pass the [fp]ork".) T -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? -- Michael Beibl
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
"Nick Sabalausky" wrote in message news:jjavf2$1v3p$1...@digitalmars.com... > "James Miller" wrote in message > news:mailman.235.1331210469.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >>On 9 March 2012 01:23, Stewart Gordon wrote: >>> >>> I'm finding it hard to figure how someone would pronounce the "o" and >>> "u" in >>> "colour" separately. >>> > > I would imagine it'd be like "kuh-lore". > >>Being British means that I do notice the differences in pronunciation, >>I've pretty much done the opposite to Reagan, gone from England to NZ. >>I tend to get frustrated when I can't even correct pronunciation >>because nobody can hear the difference! > > I have a little extra insight into this as my mom is a speech/language > pathologist: > > As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference often > doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't necessarily give > them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think the right thing to do, > at least in cases where it actually matters, is to instruct them on the > actual mouth movements involved. Then they can "feel" the difference, and > start to hear themselves making the different sound. "Hearing" it can > naturally follow from that. > Out of curiosity, I just asked her about this and she said that "hearing" it *does* typically come first, so I guess I was wrong about that. But she did say that failing that, yea, bringing in instruction on the mouth movements can be a reasonable next step as it brings other senses into play.
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 06:30:05PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "H. S. Teoh" wrote in message > news:mailman.270.1331248862.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:29:05PM +, Stewart Gordon wrote: [...] > >> But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious > > [...] > > > > Well, it's pretentious in English, but quite mellifluous in Russian. > > :-) Though I'm told that even for native Russian speakers, it's one > > of the last sounds acquired, so it must be pretty difficult. (And to > > make things worse, they have *two* rolled R's, one palatized, one > > not. As if one R isn't hard enough already.) > > > > R in general is a very difficult sound no matter what variation of R. > In native English countries, R is one of the most (if not the most) > common sounds for kids to have touble with. ^^ ahh, the irony :-) I mean, iony. T -- "The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
"H. S. Teoh" wrote in message news:mailman.270.1331248862.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:29:05PM +, Stewart Gordon wrote: >> On 08/03/2012 19:29, H. S. Teoh wrote: >> >> >Another thing is, I can't roll my R's. My tongue as stiff as a stick >> >and just refuses to roll anything, no matter how hard I try. >> >> >> I can't roll my tongue either. I'm told it's genetic. :) >> >> But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious > [...] > > Well, it's pretentious in English, but quite mellifluous in Russian. :-) > Though I'm told that even for native Russian speakers, it's one of the > last sounds acquired, so it must be pretty difficult. (And to make > things worse, they have *two* rolled R's, one palatized, one not. As if > one R isn't hard enough already.) > R in general is a very difficult sound no matter what variation of R. In native English countries, R is one of the most (if not the most) common sounds for kids to have touble with.
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
"Stewart Gordon" wrote in message news:jjbbrn$2o1n$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 08/03/2012 19:29, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >> Another thing is, I can't roll my R's. My tongue as stiff as a stick and >> just refuses to roll anything, no matter how hard I try. > > > I can't roll my tongue either. I'm told it's genetic. :) > I couldn't pronounce R at all until I was taught it sometime around third or fourth grade (Interestingly, I didn't even know that I couldn't pronounce it). When I was learning it, rolling the R was the *only* way I could pronounce R. Once I learned to speak a non-rolled R, I completely *lost* the ability to roll my R's. Fast-foward many years until now, and I can *kinda* roll them. Anyway, I just always thought that was weird. > But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious > It seems Spanish to me ;) "Get your yappy 'perro' off my leg!"
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:29:05PM +, Stewart Gordon wrote: > On 08/03/2012 19:29, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > >Another thing is, I can't roll my R's. My tongue as stiff as a stick > >and just refuses to roll anything, no matter how hard I try. > > > I can't roll my tongue either. I'm told it's genetic. :) > > But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious [...] Well, it's pretentious in English, but quite mellifluous in Russian. :-) Though I'm told that even for native Russian speakers, it's one of the last sounds acquired, so it must be pretty difficult. (And to make things worse, they have *two* rolled R's, one palatized, one not. As if one R isn't hard enough already.) T -- Doubt is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
On 08/03/2012 18:55, Nick Sabalausky wrote: As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference often doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't necessarily give them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think the right thing to do, at least in cases where it actually matters, is to instruct them on the actual mouth movements involved. Then they can "feel" the difference, and start to hear themselves making the different sound. "Hearing" it can naturally follow from that. Yes, it seems that people's ears are tailored to the language they speak. But then again, even native English speakers have trouble with sounds that are distinguished by others; a consequence is that the distinction between the "w" and "wh" sounds has largely been lost. On the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures last year, there was a bit on speech perception. Two sound samples both sounded like "duck" to typical English ears, but the Hindi speaker in the audience heard them to be different (it's probably down to short-breath and long-breath consonants, which we would transliterate as "d" and "dh"). A similar thing is the "tsu" sound in Japanese. The "TS" combination is very intimidating for most English speakers, and I doubt many English speakers can easily hear it. But as my class's instructor pointed out: It's exactly like the "ts" at the end of "boots". So just say that and folow up with a "u". Now I can say and hear it just fine (At least, I *think* I can - a native Japanese speaker would have to be the real judge). Indeed. But English speakers aren't used "ts" occurring at the beginning of a word, and so might drop either the "t" or the "s". There are a number of initial consonant clusters in African languages that, likewise, occur only in the middle or at the end of a word in English, and so an English speaker will find these African words hard to pronounce. Stewart.
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation
On 08/03/2012 19:29, H. S. Teoh wrote: Another thing is, I can't roll my R's. My tongue as stiff as a stick and just refuses to roll anything, no matter how hard I try. I can't roll my tongue either. I'm told it's genetic. :) But anyway, to me, rolling Rs seems pretentious Stewart.
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 01:55:45PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "James Miller" wrote in message > news:mailman.235.1331210469.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... [...] > >Being British means that I do notice the differences in > >pronunciation, I've pretty much done the opposite to Reagan, gone > >from England to NZ. I tend to get frustrated when I can't even > >correct pronunciation because nobody can hear the difference! > > I have a little extra insight into this as my mom is a speech/language > pathologist: > > As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference often > doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't necessarily > give them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think the right > thing to do, at least in cases where it actually matters, is to > instruct them on the actual mouth movements involved. Then they can > "feel" the difference, and start to hear themselves making the > different sound. "Hearing" it can naturally follow from that. I couldn't agree more! When I first started learning Russian, I simply could not hear the difference between И and Ы. At all. They sounded identical to me. Or rather, I notice there's a difference when a native speaker says both sounds, but I couldn't pinpoint what that difference was, nor could I reproduce the sounds, or distinguish between them when heard in isolation. It took a lot of research to find out exactly how to pronounce Ы (И is relatively easy), and a lot of effort to learn how to tell them apart in different contexts, before I started "hearing" the difference. Now I was somewhat lucky that my mother tongue distinguishes between an aspirated T (the T at the beginning of an English word) and a non-aspirated T (the Russian Т, or, for that matter, the Spanish T). So I had no trouble pronouncing the Russian T correctly, but another guy who was also learning Russian couldn't tell the difference, and as a result always spoke with a heavy "foreigner accent". I can't say I've mastered it all, though... one thing that still throws me off is Л and ЛЬ right before a consonant. I can do it right if a vowel immediately follows, but I have a lot of trouble if ЛЬ is followed by a consonant. I couldn't hear the difference at all. Now I can somewhat tell, but I still slip up all the time when I try to pronounce it myself. Another thing is, I can't roll my R's. My tongue as stiff as a stick and just refuses to roll anything, no matter how hard I try. I've tried to follow online tutorials, but it just doesn't work for me. :-( T -- Doubtless it is a good thing to have an open mind, but a truly open mind should be open at both ends, like the food-pipe, with the capacity for excretion as well as absorption. -- Northrop Frye
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was:Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
"James Miller" wrote in message news:mailman.235.1331210469.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >On 9 March 2012 01:23, Stewart Gordon wrote: >> >> I'm finding it hard to figure how someone would pronounce the "o" and "u" >> in >> "colour" separately. >> I would imagine it'd be like "kuh-lore". >Being British means that I do notice the differences in pronunciation, >I've pretty much done the opposite to Reagan, gone from England to NZ. >I tend to get frustrated when I can't even correct pronunciation >because nobody can hear the difference! I have a little extra insight into this as my mom is a speech/language pathologist: As you've noticed, trying to get a person to hear the difference often doesn't work (And even if they can hear it, that doesn't necessarily give them enough info to actually pronounce it). I think the right thing to do, at least in cases where it actually matters, is to instruct them on the actual mouth movements involved. Then they can "feel" the difference, and start to hear themselves making the different sound. "Hearing" it can naturally follow from that. When I started (trying to) learn Japanese, I had trouble hearing the Japanese "R" sound. But the instructor explained how to pronounce it: Pay attention to how your tongue is positioned when saying the English "R" and "L". For the Japanese "R", do the same thing, but put your tongue about half-way in-between: just in front of what's called the "boney ridge" instead of just behind it (English "R") or on the back of the teeth (English "L"). After learning that, I was able to not only pronounce it (more or less) but also hear the difference much better since I actually knew what to expect (interestingly, the Japanese "R" frequently sounds more like a "D" than an English "L" or "R"). A similar thing is the "tsu" sound in Japanese. The "TS" combination is very intimidating for most English speakers, and I doubt many English speakers can easily hear it. But as my class's instructor pointed out: It's exactly like the "ts" at the end of "boots". So just say that and folow up with a "u". Now I can say and hear it just fine (At least, I *think* I can - a native Japanese speaker would have to be the real judge).
Re: [OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was: Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On 9 March 2012 01:23, Stewart Gordon wrote: > On 08/03/2012 11:04, Regan Heath wrote: >> >> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:21:00 -, Derek wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 05:38:08 +1100, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >>> British English may be the more "official" English, with American English as a mere variation ... >>> >>> >>> In one sense, American English is often a sort of abbreviated version in >>> which seemingly >>> superfluous letters are omitted. But in other cases, it more accurately >>> reflects >>> pronunciation (colorize verses colourise). > > > Indeed. Sometimes the British spelling is more logical (judgement versus > judgment). Sometimes the American spelling is more logical (skeptical versus > sceptical). > >> In Britain (where I live) there are people to pronounce the 'u' in colour, >> and colourise. >> The difference is subtle, and I've found many people simply cannot hear >> it. > > > > I'm finding it hard to figure how someone would pronounce the "o" and "u" in > "colour" separately. > > But to me, it's just the same phoneme as found in most -er and -or words. > > Stewart. Being British means that I do notice the differences in pronunciation, I've pretty much done the opposite to Reagan, gone from England to NZ. I tend to get frustrated when I can't even correct pronunciation because nobody can hear the difference! -- James Miller
[OT] American versus British spelling and pronunciation (was: Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous)
On 08/03/2012 11:04, Regan Heath wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:21:00 -, Derek wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 05:38:08 +1100, Nick Sabalausky wrote: British English may be the more "official" English, with American English as a mere variation ... In one sense, American English is often a sort of abbreviated version in which seemingly superfluous letters are omitted. But in other cases, it more accurately reflects pronunciation (colorize verses colourise). Indeed. Sometimes the British spelling is more logical (judgement versus judgment). Sometimes the American spelling is more logical (skeptical versus sceptical). In Britain (where I live) there are people to pronounce the 'u' in colour, and colourise. The difference is subtle, and I've found many people simply cannot hear it. I'm finding it hard to figure how someone would pronounce the "o" and "u" in "colour" separately. But to me, it's just the same phoneme as found in most -er and -or words. Stewart.
