Is it too late for my American-sounding toddler?

[Martha N.]

I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.

Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?

Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Thanks for any advice.

[Adrian Bailey]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

1. We're concerned that our 3-year-old sounds _too much_ like the local
people! I think you should be happy that yours sounds more like you.

2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk?
By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels
uncomfortably different, you'll discover that at his age he'll learn to
conform in no time. Whatever transpires, there's no need for any
"retraining".

Adrian

[TsuiDF]

Post by Adrian Bailey
2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk?
By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels
uncomfortably different, you'll discover that at his age he'll learn to
conform in no time. Whatever transpires, there's no need for any
"retraining".

At age 5+ I wasn't exactly 'picked on' but I did have to answer an
inordinate number of inquiries along the lines of 'Speak (or 'talk')
some English!' This from native speakers of the language in
Massachusetts, when we emigrated there from Lancashire. Of course,
the same Bay Staters also badgered us with 'Do you know the Queen?',
'Have you met the Beatles?', and 'I love your accent, are you from
Australia?' They also frequently offered us English muffins under the
impression that so doing would make us feel 'at home'.

I didn't lose my accent until I was about 14. By the time I was about
17 I had decided that the local accents of the places where I'd been
living (the aforesaid Bay State and upstate New York) were a bit too
extreme for future use, so chose myself a different accent when I went
to university.

I am no longer asked any of the above questions, but I doubt the
accent change is the reason.

cheers,
Stephanie
in Brussels

[Robert Bannister]

Post by TsuiDF

Post by Adrian Bailey
2. Do you really think that 4-year-olds are picked on for the way they talk?
By whom? The other kids? The teachers? If he _is_ picked on, or if he feels
uncomfortably different, you'll discover that at his age he'll learn to
conform in no time. Whatever transpires, there's no need for any
"retraining".

At age 5+ I wasn't exactly 'picked on' but I did have to answer an
inordinate number of inquiries along the lines of 'Speak (or 'talk')
some English!' This from native speakers of the language in
Massachusetts, when we emigrated there from Lancashire. Of course,
the same Bay Staters also badgered us with 'Do you know the Queen?',
'Have you met the Beatles?', and 'I love your accent, are you from
Australia?' They also frequently offered us English muffins under the
impression that so doing would make us feel 'at home'.
I didn't lose my accent until I was about 14. By the time I was about
17 I had decided that the local accents of the places where I'd been
living (the aforesaid Bay State and upstate New York) were a bit too
extreme for future use, so chose myself a different accent when I went
to university.
I am no longer asked any of the above questions, but I doubt the
accent change is the reason.

You may not have changed your accent for a long time, but I'd be willing
to bet you quickly learned to avoid some of your native vocabulary and
replace it with the local variants just so you would be understood.

[TsuiDF]

Post by Robert Bannister
You may not have changed your accent for a long time, but I'd be willing
to bet you quickly learned to avoid some of your native vocabulary and
replace it with the local variants just so you would be understood.

Indeed. Very soon after arriving in the US I turned down the offer of
'candy' because I didn't know what it was, and then saw the other
children ('kids' in local parlance, which only meant 'young goats' to
my mother, or so she then claimed) receive chocolates. I twigged to
that one reet quick, I did.

cheers,
Stephanie
learning a few local variants here too
in Brussels

[the Omrud]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

I'm sure he will pick up the local pronunciation at school. I'd be more
worried about what the local accent is. I mean, he might end up
sounding like a Brummie (we don't usually do smilies here in AUE but I
see you're not from around these parts, so :-))

[Richard Chambers]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Don't worry about it.

In 1972, I came from the Midlands (of England) to live in Yorkshire. I have
absolutely nothing against the Leeds accent, it's lovely, but as things
turned out I have picked up very little of it -- except that I now say "ont'
table", or even "ont'able", etc, instead of "on the table" etc . My wife,
who I married a couple of years after I came here, has even less of a Leeds
accent than I have -- she does not even stoop to "ont' table". Our two
children, before school age, spoke with the same accent as we have. Within a
year of starting school, they were talking with a slight Leeds accent. That
was enough for them to be able to bluff their way through the Leeds
schooling system without being picked on.

The true Leeds accent, like cockney, is an endangered species. Labour is so
mobile nowadays that people like me move into Leeds and inadvertently dilute
the local accent, while other people born and bred in Leeds move to
different parts of the country, again diluting the local accent. A city like
Leeds therefore has a complete mixture of accent, from Caribbean
[Spelling? - it's a miracle if I got that one correct] to Indian
sub-continent, to Polish, to Midlands, London and Eastbourne. We normally
aim to understand all these accents, and have plenty of practice doing it.

Another point to mention is that (because of television) the American
accent[1] is so well known in Britain that we hardly notice anybody who
happens to speak with that accent.

[1] or accents.

Richard Chambers Leeds UK.

[Mike M]

On 10 Apr, 21:25, "Richard Chambers"

Post by Richard Chambers
In 1972, I came from the Midlands (of England) to live in Yorkshire. I have
absolutely nothing against the Leeds accent, it's lovely, but as things
turned out I have picked up very little of it -- except that I now say "ont'
table", or even "ont'able", etc, instead of "on the table" etc . My wife,
who I married a couple of years after I came here, has even less of a Leeds
accent than I have -- she does not even stoop  to "ont' table". Our two
children, before school age, spoke with the same accent as we have. Within a
year of starting school, they were talking with a slight Leeds accent. That
was enough for them to be able to bluff their way through the Leeds
schooling system without being picked on.

Every single word of the above paragraph applies to me (and my wife
and children), even down to the date!

In my experience, children *always* pick up their accents from their
peers, not their parents (otherwise my Brummie schoolfriend with an
Irish mother and Polish father would have sounded very odd).

Anyway, I think foreign accents usually have a positive, rather than
negative effect - they give the speaker a slightly exotic allure
(especially with the opposite sex, which I suppose might cause a
little jealousy).

Mike M

[Mike Lyle]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
Thanks for any advice.

As the others have said, don't worry about it: he'll fit in naturally.
You may find your own accent a greater concern as it changes gradually
to Mid-Atlantic.

--
Mike.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
Thanks for any advice.

People tend to settle (unconsciously) on the regional and social
dialect they'll have for the rest of their life (see other responses
in this thread) during their middle teens, when they first become
acutely aware of social pressure and peer groups. So you have about a
decade not to worry about your son's accent, and by the time he's 13
or 14, his accent will be the least of his traits that will be
bothering you.

[James Silverton]

Peter wrote on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:10:30 -0700 (PDT):

PTD> On Apr 10, 2:38 pm, "Martha N." <***@NOSPAM.invalid>
wrote:
??>> I'm American but live in England with my English husband.
??>> Our three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me,
??>> because he pronounces some things the American way,
??>> especially the d for t in words like "wadder" and "nawdy"
??>> (water and naughty).
??>>
??>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on
??>> in school for the way he talks.
??>>
??>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
??>>
??>> Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
??>> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
??>>
??>> Thanks for any advice.

It's surprising how adaptable are kids. I started out Geordie,
switched to West Highland Scottish, went back to Geordie, then
West Yorkshire, back to the Highlands, college in Glasgow then
to the US. I think my accent stopped changing much at that
point, tho' when I bought a jacket in Oxford, the salesman said
"Shall I send it to your college?"


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

[C***@gmail.com]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
Thanks for any advice.

People tend to settle (unconsciously) on the regional and social
dialect they'll have for the rest of their life (see other responses
in this thread) during their middle teens, when they first become
acutely aware of social pressure and peer groups.

This is as may be, but the accent people have is very much about who
they identify with. I was bullied from my first schoolday, and
although I had spoken the local dialect of Finnish with my friends
until I started at school, I soon lost it entirely, because I didnt
identify with them bastards I was going to school with. Instead, I
spoke to everybody in my grandparents' literary Finnish - they were
primary school teachers whose job it was to inculcate standard
language. Now that I have been living in Southwestern Finland for half
my lifetime, I have adopted both the local accent and many local
dialectal traits. Few people believe I am from Eastern Finland at all
when they hear me speaking. The fact is that I rather like it here and
identify with the place, and have even started taking an interest in
local history. The industrial casualty where I grew up I never liked,
or identified with. It always was a place to get away from.

[Trond Engen]

Post by C***@gmail.com

Post by Peter T. Daniels
People tend to settle (unconsciously) on the regional and social
dialect they'll have for the rest of their life (see other responses
in this thread) during their middle teens, when they first become
acutely aware of social pressure and peer groups.

This is as may be, but the accent people have is very much about who
they identify with. [...] Now that I have been living in Southwestern
Finland for half my lifetime, I have adopted both the local accent
and many local dialectal traits. Few people believe I am from Eastern
Finland at all when they hear me speaking. The fact is that I rather
like it here and identify with the place, and have even started
taking an interest in local history. The industrial casualty where I
grew up I never liked, or identified with. It always was a place to
get away from.

I moved twice during childhood, at nine and thirteen. Both times I
remember adjusting my speech. First I moved within eastern Norway (the
region around Oslo) to place with a more "rustic" version of the
dialect, then across the country to a place with a dialect diverging
from my own in almost every possible way. The first time I remember
adjusting for sympathy and interest, the second time I didn't adjust
much to the local way but switched to a bookish (or socially ambitious)
Oslo sociolect to avoid being branded as a backward peasant. Elements of
local vocabulary came later as I accepted my destiny and started liking
the place.

After moving as a young adult, first to a university with students from
all over the country and then to where the job market took me -- which
happened to be back in eastern Norway -- the bookish gradually was
replaced by a more colloquial pattern. Now, 12 years after my last move,
my speech is somewhere between my two first dialects, and I notice that
it's still changing. But not so much in direction of the local dialect,
I think, as by including more features from my childhood speech.

[John Dean]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late?

Uh huh.
But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian.
Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up.
But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it
is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you.

[R H Draney]

Post by John Dean

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late?

Uh huh.
But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian.

Or that he's a great admirer of Alistair Cooke....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by John Dean

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late?

Uh huh.
But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian.
Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up.

Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more than 16 years
old or so.

At best she's picked up some local traits so when she comes home to
the US, folks notice that she has a "British accent."

Post by John Dean
But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it
is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you.

[John Dean]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Dean

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late?

Uh huh.
But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian.
Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up.

Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more than 16 years
old or so.

If Nigel Kennedy and Jamie Oliver can become cockneys late in life, anyone
can be anything they want. Think of Eliza Doolittle. Think of Harold Wilson
having elocution lessons to recapture his Yorkshire accent. Remember the
Alamo.

[James Silverton]

John wrote on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:00:47 +0100:

JD> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
??>> On Apr 10, 6:51 pm, "John Dean"
??>> <john-***@fraglineone.net> wrote:
??>>> Martha N. wrote:
??>>>> I'm American but live in England with my English
??>>>> husband. Our three-year-old must've picked up his speech
??>>>> from me, because he pronounces some things the American
??>>>> way, especially the d for t in words like "wadder" and
??>>>> "nawdy" (water and naughty).
??>>>
??>>>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked
??>>>> on in school for the way he talks.
??>>>
??>>>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
??>>>
??>>>> Is it too late?
??>>>
??>>> Uh huh.
??>>> But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's
??>>> Canadian. Or you could change the way *you* speak and let
??>>> him pick *that* up.
??>>
??>> Well, no, she can't really, since she's presumably more
??>> than 16 years old or so.
??>>
JD> If Nigel Kennedy and Jamie Oliver can become cockneys late
JD> in life, anyone can be anything they want. Think of Eliza
JD> Doolittle. Think of Harold Wilson having elocution lessons
JD> to recapture his Yorkshire accent. Remember the Alamo.

To add another politician of the last century, Pandit Nehru took
lessons to attempt to gain an Indian accent that he had not had
previously (Harrow did not teach that!)

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

[Adam Funk]

Post by John Dean
But not too late to teach him to lie and claim he's Canadian.
Or you could change the way *you* speak and let him pick *that* up.

As I said in my other post, I have trouble (or at least I think I have
trouble) pronouncing those "t"s the English way.

Post by John Dean
But the more time he spends socialising with Brit kids, the more likely it
is he'll look to synchronise with them rather than you.

ISTR Bill Bryson described his kids going to school in New Hampshire
as having British accents (and incidentally complaining about having
to walk to school), but I can't remember what their ages were when
they moved there (having lived in England since birth).

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

[Amethyst Deceiver]

In article <***@mid.individual.net>, ***@bigpond.com
says...

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite my being
a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman. That's from nursery.
Once he starts school in September his accent will change to Wet Yorks.

Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He
spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom,
bahthroom, bathroom". At home he is more likely to talk about the
bahthroom but at nursery about the bathroom. No teasing or bullying goes
on.

[HVS]

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because
he pronounces some things the American way, especially the d
for t in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to
parents). He will quickly pick up the local accent whether you
want him to or not.

This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite
my being a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman.
That's from nursery. Once he starts school in September his
accent will change to Wet Yorks.
Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things
differently.

I initially read that to mean that you have a 4-year-old son named
"Martha". (I bet *that* would get him teased.)

[mogga]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:19 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Robert Bannister
Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite my being
a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman. That's from nursery.
Once he starts school in September his accent will change to Wet Yorks.

Raining again is it?

How does he say bus?

Post by Amethyst Deceiver
Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He
spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom,
bahthroom, bathroom". At home he is more likely to talk about the
bahthroom but at nursery about the bathroom. No teasing or bullying goes
on.

Adults can have problems if they have a non-local accent. You get that
"You're not from around here" business followed by "I've lived here
for 500 years".
With yorkshire people though they tell you where they're from within
minutes of meeting you, despite their accent giving the location away.
I don't think my son has got a mancy accent - well not a great deal of
one. I speak very differently from my sisters - they sound very yocal
indeed.

[Amethyst Deceiver]

Post by mogga
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19:19 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Robert Bannister
Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

This is true. YoungBloke is linguistically a Mancunian despite my being
a southerner and OldBloke being a West Countryman. That's from nursery.
Once he starts school in September his accent will change to Wet Yorks.

Raining again is it?

As ever.

Post by mogga
How does he say bus?

With the u sound in "put". All his u sounds are that one. His "cup" and
"mummy" sound very different from mine. I'm a southerner.

Post by mogga

Post by Amethyst Deceiver
Martha - my son (4) is aware that some people say things differently. He
spent a happy five minutes recently saying "bahthroom, bathroom,
bahthroom, bathroom". At home he is more likely to talk about the
bahthroom but at nursery about the bathroom. No teasing or bullying goes
on.

Adults can have problems if they have a non-local accent. You get that
"You're not from around here" business followed by "I've lived here
for 500 years".
With yorkshire people though they tell you where they're from within
minutes of meeting you, despite their accent giving the location away.
I don't think my son has got a mancy accent - well not a great deal of
one. I speak very differently from my sisters - they sound very yocal
indeed.

In my neck of the woods it's not uncommon for people to say "oh, no, I'm
not local, I'm from [3 miles away] and I only moved here 30 years ago".

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

Not always. My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent
much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his
life (early teens at the time) in Illinois.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Ariariar]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 06:45:20 -0700 (PDT),
"***@yahoo.com" <***@yahoo.com> said:

(Snip)

Post by j***@yahoo.com
My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent
much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his
life (early teens at the time) in Illinois

Pat: Have you lived all your life in New York City?
Mike: Not yet.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

Not always. My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent
much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his
life (early teens at the time) in Illinois.

How different and how strong are they? And how desirable are the two
accents? And which accent is more likely to heard on TV?

Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely
some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something
I did notice in the classroom was an initial inclination to change to
the local accent, followed later, as the child grew in confidence and
had been accepted by his/her peers, to a change back to the original
accent, but with local vocabulary items and some accent modification.

[j***@yahoo.com]

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

Not always. My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent
much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his
life (early teens at the time) in Illinois.

How different and how strong are they?

Quite noticeably different, to an American. I'm not sure how to
measure strength of accents (especially in sci.lang). The accent of
the lad in question was maybe halfway between the most and least
prestigious versions of a New York accent.

Post by Robert Bannister
And how desirable are the two accents?

The "lowest" New York accent, what Labov calls Brooklynese (I think),
probably the most undesirable accent in North America, though that may
have changed since September, 2001, when firefighters and others with
that accent were being lionized (not unreasonably). But I'm talking
about the late '80s. The accents of east-central Illinois are not
considered especially desirable, I think. But this kid would have
heard a variety of accents in that college town (Urbana, Illinois).

Post by Robert Bannister
And which accent is more likely to heard on TV?

On national TV, a "lower" version of the New York one, but generally
for comic or criminal characters. On local TV he would have heard
versions of the local accent fairly often, I think (but I didn't watch
much TV, so I don't know).

Post by Robert Bannister
Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely
some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something
I did notice in the classroom was an initial inclination to change to
the local accent, followed later, as the child grew in confidence and
had been accepted by his/her peers, to a change back to the original
accent, but with local vocabulary items and some accent modification.

A good trick. I can't imagine doing it, but I've never been in that
situation.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Children always conform to peer groups (although rarely to parents). He
will quickly pick up the local accent whether you want him to or not.

Not always.  My advisor's younger son, last I saw him, had an accent
much like his parents' New York accents, though he had spent all his
life (early teens at the time) in Illinois.

How different and how strong are they?

Quite noticeably different, to an American.  I'm not sure how to
measure strength of accents (especially in sci.lang).  The accent of
the lad in question was maybe halfway between the most and least
prestigious versions of a New York accent.

Post by Robert Bannister
And how desirable are the two accents?

The "lowest" New York accent, what Labov calls Brooklynese (I think),

Labov denies there is any geographic accent variation within New York
City; he says the social stratification is uniform citywide.

probably the most undesirable accent in North America, though that may
have changed since September, 2001, when firefighters and others with
that accent were being lionized (not unreasonably).  But I'm talking
about the late '80s.  The accents of east-central Illinois are not
considered especially desirable, I think.  But this kid would have
heard a variety of accents in that college town (Urbana, Illinois).

Post by Robert Bannister
And which accent is more likely to heard on TV?

On national TV, a "lower" version of the New York one, but generally
for comic or criminal characters.  On local TV he would have heard
versions of the local accent fairly often, I think (but I didn't watch
much TV, so I don't know).

Few or no local NY TV anchors have a local accent, even the oldest,
such as Gabe Pressman. Radio announcers very often do.

Network TV personnel, curiously, often do have local accents -- such
as Dan Rather and, noteworthily, the instantly identifiable New Yorker
Daniel Schorr (now on NPR).

Post by Robert Bannister
Any of these could affect the outcome, although there are definitely
some children who cling tenaciously to their original accent. Something
I did notice in the classroom was an initial inclination to change to
the local accent, followed later, as the child grew in confidence and
had been accepted by his/her peers, to a change back to the original
accent, but with local vocabulary items and some accent modification.

A good trick.  I can't imagine doing it, but I've never been in that
situation.

You probably wouldn't realize you were doing it.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

Individual children vary enormously in this. 35 years ago my (then)
wife was in exactly the position you describe: she was an American
woman living in England with her English husband. We had two daughters,
one born in 1969, the other in 1971. The older picked the accent of
whatever children she interacted with within a day of changing her
environment, the younger spoke in her own way completely unaffected by
how the children around her spoke. Around 1978 they went for about two
months to the US, while I stayed in England. The older one sounded
American the first time they telephoned me (i.e. within a day or so of
arriving); the younger one sounded just as British as ever when they
came back. Both of them now live in the US, and their accents have
switched around: the older one still sounds British even to a British
person (she doubtless sounds very British to Americans); the younger
one sounds American (to me; her friends there may think otherwise).

All this to say that almost nothing you can do will affect the way your
child speaks. I certainly wouldn't try to stop him sounding American.
If you want to stop him acquiring a strong local British accent you
need to choose his school with care.

[Marc]

Post by Martha N.
Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

You have nothing to worry about.

I went to London at nine years old and went from an American accent to
the local accent in about six months. I personally have no memory of
this, but all my relatives tell me it's so, so it must be true. It
took me about the same amount of time to regain my American accent at
the age of eleven when I moved back to the States. (Again, no memory
of ever being even aware of my accent.)

Marc

[Martin Rich]

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:38:33 -0600 (MDT), "Martha N."

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

My grandmother was born in America, but came to England at the age of
around 7 and lived in Manchester until around her mid-teens. As an
adult she spoke pure Mancunian English.

From memory, there's a woman called Judith Rich Harris (no relation of
mine) who studied the children of Hungarian immigrants into America,
and particularly why they picked up American voices from their peers,
and not Hungarian accents from their parents. I think she used this
to make some controversial inferences about parental influence, but
the fundamental point stands, that children acquire the accent of
where they grow up.

It's fairly certain that your son will start speaking British English
once he's at school. I appreciate your anxiety that he might get
picked on when he starts school, but probably better to deal with that
if and when it happens (the school should be supportive if he is being
bullied), than try to train him to speak differently now.

Interestingly, my son was friendly with a little boy both of whose
parents were American, but who lived and attended nursery/pre-school
in England. At 3 years old this boy's accent was genuinely
mid-Atlantic.


Martin

[Matthew Huntbach]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?

No, it is not too late. At the age of three and for quite a few years
later, kids tend naturally to pick up the accent around them. So the
likelihood is that your child will pick up whatever is the predominant
accent in his school.

Dpending on where it is you plan to live, you may well find your school
in England has children with a great variety of accents anyway. In
London this seems to result with children emerging with a generic
London mix, which is significantly different from the Estuary
English formerly London associated, but now more the accent of the
outer suburbs and surrounding counties.

A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway,
your child might be admired for it rather than bullied. But likelihood
is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch
it off when talking at school.

Matthew Huntbach

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2008-04-11 11:52:09 +0200, Matthew Huntbach <***@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> said:

[ ... ]

Post by Matthew Huntbach
A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway,
your child might be admired for it rather than bullied.

That is certainly true. Most people in Europe (especially children)
think that American television programmes present an accurate picture
of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican
very glamorous.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
But likelihood
is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch
it off when talking at school.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
[ ... ]

Post by Matthew Huntbach
A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway,
your child might be admired for it rather than bullied.

That is certainly true. Most people in Europe (especially children)
think that American television programmes present an accurate picture
of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican

Just a typo; not intentional.

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
very glamorous.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
But likelihood
is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch
it off when talking at school.

[Chuck Riggs]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:05:17 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
[ ... ]

Post by Matthew Huntbach
A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway,
your child might be admired for it rather than bullied.

That is certainly true. Most people in Europe (especially children)
think that American television programmes present an accurate picture
of American life, and consequently find the idea of being Amerrican
very glamorous.

Are most Europeans, even children, so gullible? I may not have been
born one, but I've lived among two varieties of them enough years to
think your generalization is somewhat cruel.
With today's mass communications, couldn't today's young people,
whether European, Asian or American, be characterized as more jaded
than naive?

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Matthew Huntbach
But likelihood
is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch
it off when talking at school.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Matthew Huntbach
A bit of American would probably be considered rather glamorous anyway,
your child might be admired for it rather than bullied. But likelihood
is he'll grow up able to switch it on when talking to you, and switch
it off when talking at school.

That last bit makes a lot of sense. I suspect most children, like
adults, have a variety of accents and grammar/vocabulary that they turn
on and off for specific situations.

[Welches]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
Thanks for any advice.

I've found the replies interesting.
My parents were from the midlands and say things like "b-ar-th" and
"gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north where it's a short "a" rather than
"ar".
All three of us children grew up with the southern accent, and all got
teased/bullied about it, from about age 7. It was said to be "posh". I kept
this accent until I went to secondary school, when I deliberately changed my
accent. I had a friend at primary who came (gradually north in stages) from
London and she had had similar problems once she hit northern accented
schools (so much that in one school she refused to speak at all)
Of course when I came south to college, everyone said hown northern I
sounded...

To the OP. I don't think the American accent will be much of a problem. Just
make sure you use "trousers" rather than "pants". That's probably the most
likely thing that can get laughed at.
I'd also give him something to say when someone says "why do you talk like
that?" and they will, even at a young age. If he knows to say "mummy's from
America" it gives him something to say when he's asked.

Debbie

[Matthew Huntbach]

Post by Welches

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

I've found the replies interesting.
My parents were from the midlands and say things like "b-ar-th" and
"gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north where it's a short "a" rather than
"ar".

We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they
pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of
as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the
difference between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc,
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who pronounce their
'h's and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" where
"cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have in English).

Matthew Huntbach

[Marc]

Post by Matthew Huntbach
We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they
pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of
as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the

And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash
(appropriately making Washington Warshington).

Marc

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Marc

Post by Matthew Huntbach
We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they
pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of
as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the

And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash
(appropriately making Washington Warshington).

Which, to the persons Matthew was instructing, will appear to make no
sense at all!

[John Varela]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:07:26 -0400, Marc wrote
(in article

Post by Marc
And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash
(appropriately making Washington Warshington).

That's the local Washingtonian way of saying it.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by John Varela
(in article

Post by Marc
And then there are those Americans who say warsh instead of wash
(appropriately making Washington Warshington).

That's the local Washingtonian way of saying it.

Not Washington, DC, but St. Louis, MO, site of Washington University.

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Welches

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

I've found the replies interesting.
My parents were from the midlands and say things like "b-ar-th" and
"gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north where it's a short "a" rather than
"ar".

We need to remember, when communicating with Americans, that they
pronounce their 'r's. So what you write as "ar", they will think of
as symbolising "arrr". You could write it as "ah" to convey the
difference between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc,
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who pronounce their 'h's

Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-)
How do they write them down? :-)
pjk

Post by Matthew Huntbach
and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th" where
"cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have in English).
Matthew Huntbach

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha
[...]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Welches
My parents were from the midlands and say things like
"b-ar-th" and "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north
where it's a short "a" rather than "ar".

We need to remember, when communicating with Americans,
that they pronounce their 'r's.

A majority of Americans are rhotic, but by no means all.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
So what you write as "ar", they will think of as
symbolising "arrr".

Depends on where you're writing. I can think of a couple of
newsgroups in which many of the Americans would understand.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
You could write it as "ah" to convey the difference
between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc,

This, however, is indeed safer.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who
pronounce their 'h's

Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-)
How do they write them down? :-)

They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while
writing the fourth letter of the alphabet.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th"
where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have
in English).

There are two common articulations of American /r/, and
neither is guttural.

Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Welches
My parents were from the midlands and say things like
"b-ar-th" and "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north
where it's a short "a" rather than "ar".

We need to remember, when communicating with Americans,
that they pronounce their 'r's.

A majority of Americans are rhotic, but by no means all.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
So what you write as "ar", they will think of as
symbolising "arrr".

Depends on where you're writing.  I can think of a couple of
newsgroups in which many of the Americans would understand.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
You could write it as "ah" to convey the difference
between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc,

This, however, is indeed safer.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who
pronounce their 'h's

Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any.  :-)
How do they write them down?  :-)

They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while
writing the fourth letter of the alphabet.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th"
where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have
in English).

There are two common articulations of American /r/, and
neither is guttural.

And that has something to do with the comment on the spelling <ah> for
the vowel [a(:)]?

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha
[...]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Welches
My parents were from the midlands and say things like
"b-ar-th" and "gr-ar-ss". I was brought up in the north
where it's a short "a" rather than "ar".

We need to remember, when communicating with Americans,
that they pronounce their 'r's.

A majority of Americans are rhotic, but by no means all.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
So what you write as "ar", they will think of as
symbolising "arrr".

Depends on where you're writing. I can think of a couple of
newsgroups in which many of the Americans would understand.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
You could write it as "ah" to convey the difference
between southern and northern "bath", "grass" etc,

This, however, is indeed safer.

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who
pronounce their 'h's

Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-)
How do they write them down? :-)

They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while
writing the fourth letter of the alphabet.

Yes, but those would be Russians writing Ukrainian 'h's. :-)
He said "Russians pronounce their 'h's".
There are no such animals in that particular jungle. :-)

Apart from there being no Russian 'h', many Russians can't
pronounce anybody else's 'h'. You may notice that new Russian
emigrees (as well as some Poles) often mispronounce 'h' as
'ch' (as in 'loch').
pjk

Post by Brian M. Scott

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
and so will think you mean something like "ba-cough-th"
where "cough" represents a guttural sound we don't have
in English).

There are two common articulations of American /r/, and
neither is guttural.
Brian

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:12:29 +1200, Paul J Kriha

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:55:10 +1200, Paul J Kriha

[...]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Brian M. Scott

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Matthew Huntbach
(then you will only confuse Russians, Arabs, etc, who
pronounce their 'h's

Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-)
How do they write them down? :-)

They think 'this is really Ukrainian' very loudly while
writing the fourth letter of the alphabet.

Yes, but those would be Russians writing Ukrainian 'h's. :-)
He said "Russians pronounce their 'h's".

Yes, but you asked how they wrote them down. Since they
have none, they have to steal someone else's!

Post by Paul J Kriha
There are no such animals in that particular jungle. :-)
Apart from there being no Russian 'h', many Russians can't
pronounce anybody else's 'h'. You may notice that new Russian
emigrees (as well as some Poles) often mispronounce 'h' as
'ch' (as in 'loch').

Which is why borrowings like <gospital'> always rather
amused me.

Brian

[Reinhold (Rey) Aman]

Paul J Kriha wrote:

[...]

Post by Paul J Kriha
Russians pronounce their 'h's? I didn't know they had any. :-)
How do they write them down? :-)

Very carefully, like the Ukrainians.

~~~ Reinhold (Rey) Aman ~~~

[Mary Ann]

Hello,

Post by Martha N.
We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on in
school for the way he talks.
Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?

I don't think you should. He should learn to appreciate why you have a
different accent.

Post by Martha N.
Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
for any advice.

I think you'll find that he'll speak differently depending on the
environment he's in.
I bet your husband can tell whether you are speaking to someone from
England or someone from the US when you are talking on the phone or
maybe when you've come back from a visit to the US your accent is
stronger.

We moved to Norfolk when I was 6. I think my siblings and I all had an
ability to "speak Norfolk" when with our local friends, but spoke
differently to our parents. Social creatures mostly subconsciously try
and fit into the group they are in.

Mary Ann

[James Silverton]

Mary wrote on Sat, 12 Apr 2008 03:41:44 -0700 (PDT):

??>> We plan to stay here and I don't want him to be picked on
??>> in school for the way he talks.

??>> Can we retrain him not to sound American? How?

MA> I don't think you should. He should learn to appreciate why
MA> you have a different accent.
??>>
??>> Is it too late? Or will he automatically pick up the local
??>> pronunciations when he spends more time with local people?
??>> for any advice.

MA> I think you'll find that he'll speak differently depending
MA> on the environment he's in.
MA> I bet your husband can tell whether you are speaking to
MA> someone from England or someone from the US when you are
MA> talking on the phone or maybe when you've come back from a
MA> visit to the US your accent is stronger.

You know that's an interesting point! I suppose as a child whose
parents moved around a lot, I shifted accents quickly to avoid
standing out. In my opinion, a lot of kids are like that. I
still remember being embarrassed at school in Leeds when my
Geordie "o" pronunciation was commented on.. I also remember my
wife pointing out, after an evening talking to friends from
Georgia, that my accent had slipped in a southerly direction and
I was in my 30s then!

I can still sing "The Blaydon Races" with a fairly good Geordie
pronunciation but it helps to have spent an hour or two talking
to my relatives from that area first. The quality of my singing
is another matter!

MA> We moved to Norfolk when I was 6. I think my siblings and I
MA> all had an ability to "speak Norfolk" when with our local
MA> friends, but spoke differently to our parents. Social
MA> creatures mostly subconsciously try and fit into the group
MA> they are in.



James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

[Adam Funk]

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language
acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately
between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as
they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I
wouldn't worry yet.

[Matthew Huntbach]

Post by Adam Funk

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Matthew Huntbach

[Mike Lyle]

[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

[b***@ihug.co.nz]

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?
--
Mike.
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed /-
@n/ (or syllabic /n/ if you will). In "Putin", as well as in
"puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally released
[t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a glottal stop.

What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"?

Ross Clark

[Pat Durkin]

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap
"t", or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed /-
@n/ (or syllabic /n/ if you will). In "Putin", as well as in
"puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally released
[t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a glottal stop.
What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"?

Right. Any association with US casual speech pronunciation and
KissingerE is extremely far-fetched.

[b***@ihug.co.nz]

Post by Pat Durkin

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap
"t", or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed /-
@n/ (or syllabic /n/ if you will). In "Putin", as well as in
"puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally released
[t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a glottal stop.
What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"?

Right. Any association with US casual speech pronunciation and
KissingerE is extremely far-fetched.

If this is a reference to the former Secretary of State, I wouldn't
expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native speaker of AmEng
say "feadure"?

Ross Clark

[Pat Durkin]

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Pat Durkin

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in
the English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely
voiceless, I aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in
British casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin",
which I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a
glottal stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the
American flap "t", or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in
its own right?

The American flapping rule does not apply before a final unstressed
"puttin'", "button", "cotton", etc, what you get is a nasally
released [t], which may be glottally reinforced or even become a
glottal stop.
What on earth do you mean by KissingerE "feadure"?

Right. Any association with US casual speech pronunciation and
KissingerE is extremely far-fetched.

If this is a reference to the former Secretary of State, I wouldn't
expect him to be typical of anything. Does any native speaker of AmEng
say "feadure"?

There may be a few who say "fee tyure", but I think most say "fee cher".
With Kissinger's thick German accent, I would think he was saying "fee
djer", but would need to hear a clip of him saying the word. Maybe he
does say "fee der".

[R H Draney]

Post by Pat Durkin
There may be a few who say "fee tyure", but I think most say "fee cher".
With Kissinger's thick German accent, I would think he was saying "fee
djer", but would need to hear a clip of him saying the word. Maybe he
does say "fee der".

Remember what the Dormouse said?...r

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)

pjk

[b***@ihug.co.nz]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Mike Lyle
[...]

Post by Matthew Huntbach

Post by Adam Funk
Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Whereas in US casual speech the 't' tends to get voiced, in British
casual speech it tends to get reduced to a glottal stop,

Which raises the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)
pjk

Hey, this is George W Bush we're talkin' about here! Don't assume he
can even pronounce "palatalized". Or "phonetics". I just took as my
starting point that he has phonemicized it as /pu:tn/ (rhymes with /
bu:t sku:tn/) and went from there.

Ross Clark

[Bart Mathias]

Post by Paul J Kriha

... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)

So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's
own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)

Bart Mathias

[Adam Funk]

Post by Bart Mathias

Post by Paul J Kriha
It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)

So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's
own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)

Yes, so you'd better be choosy about your foreign friends and
colleagues or learn to pronounce a lot of different kinds of "r".

[James Silverton]

Adam wrote on Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:38:33 +0100:

??>>> It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
??>>> in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all
??>>> equally wrong anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized
??>>> "t", which is a quite different sound altogether. :-)
??>>
??>> So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in
??>> the namee's own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)

AF> Yes, so you'd better be choosy about your foreign friends
AF> and colleagues or learn to pronounce a lot of different
AF> kinds of "r".

I've already said that the ultimate authority on the
pronunciation of a personal name is the holder but no-one called
Qwertyzip who wants to be called Bob should get too indignant
immediately, IMHO. If the name uses sounds that are not usual in
English, it may be a long time! As far as Mr. Putin is
concerned, his name is a bit unfortunate and I have heard it
pronounced just as in French Canadian heart attack food,
"Poutine".

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

[Robert Bannister]

Post by Bart Mathias

Post by Paul J Kriha

... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)

So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's
own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)

Isn't it a question of politeness? I don't believe for one moment that
anyone would expect you or anyone else to produce the exact
pronunciation of a difficult-to-pronounce foreign name, but a fair
attempt would no doubt be appreciated. Don't we try to call people in
our own countries by the name they wish to be called by?

By "fair attempt", I suppose I mean getting as close as possible while
using mainly the sounds in the speaker's own language, and that is where
the problem lies. I imagine GWB's pronunciation of Putin is as close as
he can get in his dialect, so perhaps this is one instance where we
shouldn't put him down. When it comes to newsreaders, however, I do
think they could do a better job.

[Skitt]

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by Bart Mathias
So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's
own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)

Isn't it a question of politeness? I don't believe for one moment that
anyone would expect you or anyone else to produce the exact
pronunciation of a difficult-to-pronounce foreign name, but a fair
attempt would no doubt be appreciated. Don't we try to call people in
our own countries by the name they wish to be called by?
By "fair attempt", I suppose I mean getting as close as possible while
using mainly the sounds in the speaker's own language, and that is
where the problem lies. I imagine GWB's pronunciation of Putin is as
close as he can get in his dialect, so perhaps this is one instance
where we shouldn't put him down. When it comes to newsreaders,
however, I do think they could do a better job.

An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as in my
native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can change
considerably.

Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me when
Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative, when other
cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is especially noticeable
when someone is being addressed (vocative case being required).

[Ruud Harmsen]

Post by Skitt
An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as in my
native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can change
considerably.
Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me when
Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative, when other
cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is especially noticeable
when someone is being addressed (vocative case being required).

It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected
language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is,
but I heard it.)

[Skitt]

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Skitt
An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as
in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can
change considerably.
Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me
when Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative,
when other cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is
especially noticeable when someone is being addressed (vocative case
being required).

It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected
language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is,
but I heard it.)

I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton".
It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it
sounds strange.

The same sort of ending change for the feminine gender exists also in
Latvian.

[b***@ihug.co.nz]

Post by Skitt

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Skitt
An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as
in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can
change considerably.
Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me
when Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative,
when other cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is
especially noticeable when someone is being addressed (vocative case
being required).

It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected
language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is,
but I heard it.)

I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton".

Or could just as well be the genitive/accusative if they're talking
about Bill.

Ross Clark

Post by Skitt
It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it
sounds strange.
The same sort of ending change for the feminine gender exists also in
Latvian.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Skitt

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Skitt
An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such as
in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name endings can
change considerably.
Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to me
when Latvian names are used by English speakers in the nominative,
when other cases would be called for in Latvian usage. It is
especially noticeable when someone is being addressed (vocative case
being required).

It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected
language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is,
but I heard it.)

I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton".

Or could just as well be the genitive/accusative if they're talking
about Bill.
Ross Clark

The Hillary's surname name is much more likely to be "Clintonova"
or "Klintonova", not "Clintona".

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Skitt
It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it
sounds strange.

It's not only that it would sound strange when you speak Russian,
it's decidedly ungrammatical if the name is not properly declined.
Sometimes, without a correctly declined name the sentence may
become ambiguous or loose correct meaning.

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Skitt
The same sort of ending change for the feminine gender exists also in
Latvian.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/

pjk

[Skitt]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by b***@ihug.co.nz

Post by Skitt

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Skitt
An interesting thing happens in heavily inflected languages, such
as in my native tongue (Latvian -- with 7 cases). The name
endings can change considerably.
Even though it can't be any other way, it still sounds strange to
me when Latvian names are used by English speakers in the
nominative, when other cases would be called for in Latvian
usage. It is especially noticeable when someone is being
addressed (vocative case being required).

It's equally strange to hear English names inflected in inflected
language, like Clintona in Russian. (Don't know which case that is,
but I heard it.)

I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton".

Or could just as well be the genitive/accusative if they're talking
about Bill.

The Hillary's surname name is much more likely to be "Clintonova"
or "Klintonova", not "Clintona".

That's only if her husband were Klintonov.

Look at Yuri Sharapov and his daughter Masha Sharapova. (Yeah, just look at
her!)

[Ruud Harmsen]

Post by Skitt
I could be wrong, but I think that's just the feminine version of "Clinton".

Could be, although I heard it many years ago, when Bill was president
and Hillary wans't in the picture very much.
Perhaps it was actually Klintono with an unstressed o that I
(mis)heard as a?

Post by Skitt
It's not so strange if you speak Russian, though. If you don't, all of it
sounds strange.

Of course.

Could my "Klintona" have been a genitive? In
http://www.alphadictionary.com/rusgrammar/case.html I see a Borisa in
the sentence meaning:
'Ivan wrote a letter to a friend of Boris with a pen.'

Also stola 'of the table' in Declension one, masculin.

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by Bart Mathias

Post by Paul J Kriha

... the question of the Bush pronunciation of "Putin", which
I've deprecated before. He definitely says "poo'un", with a glottal
stop. Is this the result of an attempt to avoid the American flap "t",
or a dialect feature (KissingerE "feadure") in its own right?

It doesn't really matter much whether they pronounce "t"
in "Putin" as "t" or "d" or a glottal stop, it's all equally wrong
anyway. It's supposed to be a palatalized "t", which is a quite
different sound altogether. :-)

So are we supposed to start pronouncing people's names in the namee's
own language now? ( ":-)" not withstanding.)
Bart Mathias

Well the personal names are not like geographical features.
For example, speakers in every language should be able
to decide for themselves whether they use foreign names
for foreign towns or whether they make up their own.

If Russians call Pacific Ocean Tikhiy Okean, that's okay.
If English speakers call Ukraine The Ukraine it also _should_
be okay. Myself, I don't even object to foreign names getting
mispronounced while the speaker is communicating exclusively
with speakers of his language, if that (mis)pronounciation is
indeed commonly accepted in that language.

However, when high profile people (top level politicians, BBC
announcers, Olympic games reporters) speak to potentially
international audience, the rules are different.

When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names
for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend
some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled
for two reasons, civility and communication.

pjk

[Andrew Woode]

Post by Paul J Kriha
When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names
for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend
some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled
for two reasons, civility and communication.

Agreed. I don't think anyone can object if the pronunciation used is
the closest that can be managed given the phonology (including
phonotactics) of the receiving language, even if the two phonological
systems are so far apart that the result sounds extremely strange to
speakers of the source language. But where someone has simply glanced
at a spelling which they don't understand and made a random guess as
to the associated pronunciation (such as [pju:tIn] for Putin), one can
legitimately complain about lack of due diligence. Strangely, in my
largely British media experience, the newsreaders (who may have to
deal with breaking news in previously obscure places) do rather better
than sports reporters (who get team lists in advance and could
presumably get help on pronunciation at the same time).

[Bart Mathias]

Post by Andrew Woode

Post by Paul J Kriha
When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names
for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend
some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled
for two reasons, civility and communication.

Agreed. I don't think anyone can object if the pronunciation used is
the closest that can be managed given the phonology (including
phonotactics) of the receiving language, even if the two phonological
systems are so far apart that the result sounds extremely strange to
speakers of the source language. [...]

That was of course the thought behind my question. English has no
(more-) palatalized "t" to replace that of /ti/.

As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Bart Mathias

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Andrew Woode

Post by Paul J Kriha
When I say Munich or Mnichov, it's fine, these are names
for München in diferrent languages. But one should spend
some visible effort to pronounce persons' names unmangled
for two reasons, civility and communication.

Agreed. I don't think anyone can object if the pronunciation used is
the closest that can be managed given the phonology (including
phonotactics) of the receiving language, even if the two phonological
systems are so far apart that  the result sounds extremely strange to
speakers of the source language. [...]

That was of course the thought behind my question.  English has no
(more-) palatalized "t" to replace that of /ti/.
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Bart's /&/ is /@/; it's 'Paris'.

Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:02:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/?

No general merger is necessary: /Er/ is a common variant of
/ær/ under stress, e.g., <parrot> /'***@t/ ~ /'pæ***@t/,
<carrot> /'***@t/ ~ /'kæ***@t/, <marry> = <merry>, <carry>
/'kEri/ ~ /kæri/, etc.

Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:02:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/?

No general merger is necessary: /Er/ is a common variant of
/'kEri/ ~ /kæri/, etc.

Sure. In Chicago.

[Paul J Kriha]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/?

Is there a Springfield near Chicago and does it have nuclear
powerstation and a large constantly burning pile of rubber tyres?

This a chance for you linguist professionals to identify which
real Springfield it is.

pjk

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Paul J Kriha

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Bart Mathias
As for place names, I make an effort to say /'kyuwb&/ and /'per&s/, but
I'm never going to be willing to say things like /'tokiyow/ and /ki'yowdo/.

Why would you Americanize *the first syllable of) Cuba but not Tokyo?
(I don't know what pear-ass might be.)

Is he from Chicago, that he merges /&/ (the real /&/) and /e/?

Is there a Springfield near Chicago and does it have nuclear
powerstation and a large constantly burning pile of rubber tyres?
This a chance for you linguist professionals to identify which
real Springfield it is.

Springfield is the capital of Illinois.

The "real Springfield" is clearly a matter of national security, as
should be obvious from the very last page of credits of The Simpsons
Movie, which ends with the line "Filmed on location in Springfield,
XXXXXXXXXX," where the last represents a state name that is redacted
with heavy black marker.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Adam Funk

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

Personally, I find these words quite difficult to pronounce in the
English way (when I try to make the "t"s completely voiceless, I
aspirate them a bit much).

Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same, I
seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct
that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and are not
conceived as being "the same".

As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is
aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I
remember rightly?) Some time I would like to understand what it is
about Dutch accents that make them immediately recognizable, even
though in any respect I can describe they are usually perfect. No doubt
a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know where to
begin.

Post by Adam Funk
On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language
acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately
between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as
they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I
wouldn't worry yet.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is
aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I
remember rightly?) Some time I would like to understand what it is
about Dutch accents that make them immediately recognizable, even
though in any respect I can describe they are usually perfect. No doubt
a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know where to
begin.

Dutch t is dental and non-aspirated, so to render an English t they
(i.e. I) have to make concious effort to sound different. But many
manage.

One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Also, Dutch assimilates much more than English. This means a word like
disgusting is very hard to pronounce for them (us/me), we tend to say
either [sk] of [zg], but the correct [sg] is very hard. ([g] isn't a
Dutch sound, but many can make it anyway.

Etc. etc.

That accents are readily recognizable isn't unique. We were in Germany
in last weekend, and I heard a man speak in perfect German on the
radio, and already after two words I know he was Turkish, even though
I am not familiar with German-Turkish accent, but I know how Turkish
sounds and how some Dutch Turks speak Dutch.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 +0200: Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is
aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I
remember rightly?) Some time I would like to understand what it is
about Dutch accents that make them immediately recognizable, even
though in any respect I can describe they are usually perfect. No doubt
a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know where to
begin.

Dutch t is dental and non-aspirated, so to render an English t they
(i.e. I) have to make concious effort to sound different. But many
manage.
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it>
becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it>
becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic.

Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you
were transcribing in your square brackets.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it>
becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic.

Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you
were transcribing in your square brackets.

(OK, I'll bite.)

Post by Peter T. Daniels
So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz].

So clearly the first is Dunglish and the second correct English. Any
native speaker of English (even you, after a while), and nearly all
non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else
could it be?

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of.

Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any
type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you?

[Amethyst Deceiver]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it>
becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic.

Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you
were transcribing in your square brackets.

(OK, I'll bite.)

Post by Peter T. Daniels
So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz].

So clearly the first is Dunglish and the second correct English. Any
native speaker of English (even you, after a while), and nearly all
non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else
could it be?

The problem is that you didn't gloss what your phonetics was supposed to
represent. For all we knew, you were talking about some Dutch word. How
were we to know?

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of.

Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any
type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you?

[Mike Lyle]

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

[...]

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Peter T. Daniels
So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz].

So clearly the first is Dunglish and the second correct English. Any
native speaker of English (even you, after a while), and nearly all
non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else
could it be?

The problem is that you didn't gloss what your phonetics was supposed
to represent. For all we knew, you were talking about some Dutch
word. How were we to know?

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of.

Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any
type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you?

Eh? It looked like pretty clear ASCII IPA to me. OK, I think we use
slashes rather than square brackets, but it was otherwise pretty
conventional, wasn't it? And the context was very clearly
Dutch-speakers' accent in English.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:09:39 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:37:12 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
One problem is that /s/ and /z/ exist in (most kinds of) Dutch, but
they aren't very strictly distinguished. E.g. a final /s/ before a
vowel in the next word becomes [z] automatically. So Dutch people tend
to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz]. This is very hard so suppress even
for those (like me) who know (like me), and most don't know, and will
even deny they do it, even though they clearly do it.

Is that "this is"? I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might
be a version of.

Of course. <This is> is <Diz iss> in Dunglis(h). But <this is it>
becomes <dizzizz it>. Simple, easy and fully automatic.

Do explain how the context gave any hint of what word or phrase you
were transcribing in your square brackets.

(OK, I'll bite.)

Post by Peter T. Daniels
So Dutch people tend to say [dIzIs] instead of [DIsIz].

So clearly the first is Dunglish and the second correct English. Any
native speaker of English (even you, after a while), and nearly all
non-native speakers would recognize [DIsIz] als <this is>. What else
could it be?

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I can't think of anything else that [DIsIz] might be a version of.

Neither can I. And I wouldn't know how else to pronounce it in any
type of correct English by a native speaker. Do you?

Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

[Ruud Harmsen]

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch.
But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it
relevant in the current subthread?

[Ruud Harmsen]

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:52:21 +0200: Ruud Harmsen

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch.
But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it
relevant in the current subthread?

Moreover, my point was [s] versus [z] in final pre-vowel position. Not
the correct rendering of /D/ as [D] or something else.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch.
But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it
relevant in the current subthread?

Of course you snipped the remark that generated the question, so it's
not possible to answer the last two questions.

If you prefer to continue not to cooperate, then I will ignore you
again.

What do you mean by "correct English"?

[Ruud Harmsen]

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:51:04 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch.
But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it
relevant in the current subthread?

Of course you snipped the remark that generated the question, so it's
not possible to answer the last two questions.
If you prefer to continue not to cooperate, then I will ignore you
again.
What do you mean by "correct English"?

I will ignore you again.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:51:04 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:16:20 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Have you really never heard of English dialects that don't pronounce /
D/ as [D] but as a dental stop, or even merge it with alveolar /d/?

Da Nu Yawk accent, yes. Possibly under the influence of Dutch.
But is that correct English? Was I talking about dialects? Is it
relevant in the current subthread?

Of course you snipped the remark that generated the question, so it's
not possible to answer the last two questions.
If you prefer to continue not to cooperate, then I will ignore you
again.
What do you mean by "correct English"?

I will ignore you again.

You've never found it possible to do that.

As long as you continue to post nonsense, I will point it out.

[Mike Lyle]

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
[...]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is
aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I
remember rightly?) Some time I would like to understand what it is
about Dutch accents that make them immediately recognizable, even
though in any respect I can describe they are usually perfect. No
doubt a good mimic could mimic a Dutch accent, but I wouldn't know
where to begin.

[...]

Jeremy Clarkson does a good one. I think you have to do something with
your cheeks.

[Adam Funk]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same, I
seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct
that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and are not
conceived as being "the same".

I agree. I can tell the difference between the way I (and other
Americans) say "bedding" and "betting", but I had an amusing
conversation recently in which I was complaining about legal changes
that would lead to the proliferation of "betting shops" but the other
person (English) wondered for a few minutes why opposed the selling of
blankets and pillows in my neighbourhood ("bedding shops").

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
As for the way you over-aspirate a BrE t, I'm pretty sure my t is is
aspirated, though maybe not as much as yours. (You're Dutch, if I
remember rightly?)

No, American, but I've lived in England for a while.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Post by Adam Funk

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Although to British ears AmE "latter" and "ladder" sound the same,
I seem to recalled reading Steven Pinker's book The Language
Instinct that their stored differently in AmE speakers' brains and
are not conceived as being "the same".

It's not just that they're stored differently. They're pronounced
differently. In American English, most (in cases like this, all) of
the distinction between voiced and voiceless stops is carried on the
preceding vowel, which is held significantly longer before
(phonemically) voiced stops. So "latter" (/l&tR/) is pronounced
[l&*R], while "ladder" (/l&dR/) is pronounced [l&:*R]. The same vowel
length distinction is used to distinguish, e.g., "cap" and "cab", when
they come at the end of a sentence and the final stop is unreleased.

If an American speaker listens to a tape of someone saying "latter",
and segments from the middle of the /&/ are duplicated and inserted,
at a certain point they'll start hearing "ladder". Similarly if you
take "ladder" and chop out segments, it will change to "latter".

British speakers don't pay attention to this vowel length distinction
and therefore get confused when hearing Americans. Similarly, British
speakers don't make the vowel length distinction and American speakers
tend not to pay attention to the actual voicing (for intervocalic /t/
and /d/) and so get confused when hearing British speakers.

Post by Adam Funk
I agree. I can tell the difference between the way I (and other
Americans) say "bedding" and "betting", but I had an amusing
conversation recently in which I was complaining about legal changes
that would lead to the proliferation of "betting shops" but the
other person (English) wondered for a few minutes why opposed the
selling of blankets and pillows in my neighbourhood ("bedding
shops").

Another pair that often causes confusion is "writing" and "riding".
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |_Bauplan_ is just the German word
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |for blueprint. Typically, one
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |switches languages to indicate
|profundity.
***@hpl.hp.com | Richard Dawkins
[phone]

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Martha N.]

Post by Adam Funk

Post by Martha N.
I'm American but live in England with my English husband. Our
three-year-old must've picked up his speech from me, because he
pronounces some things the American way, especially the d for t
in words like "wadder" and "nawdy" (water and naughty).

On the other hand, I seem to recall reading in a book about language
acquisition that toddlers often voice consonants indiscriminately
between vowels and pick up the unvoiced pronunciations later (just as
they drop unstressed syllables for a while, or lisp "s" and "z"). I
wouldn't worry yet.

I won't!

Thanks to everyone who replied.