tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post640940286706847666..comments2024-03-17T09:14:13.950+00:00Comments on John Wells’s phonetic blog: prevalenceJohn Wellshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-55837610560625398682013-01-06T01:41:04.533+00:002013-01-06T01:41:04.533+00:00I know that this post is by now terribly out of da...I know that this post is by now terribly out of date, but for whatever interest it might have to the LPD, I thought that I would 'report my findings'.<br /><br />My boyfriend and I were both slightly surprised (both being horrible pedants) when we heard /prəˈveɪlənt/ from one of our friends with a broad Home Counties accent about a week ago. Obviously, the penultimate stress wasn't in the LPD when I checked it today, as you, John Wells, pointed out yourself. However, he had allegedly never heard /ˈprevələnt/, and I find it almost impossible to believe that he has never heard the word pronounced before having done very well in English literature in his A-levels.<br /><br />My friend is male, born in 1986, and has lived in the Home Counties all his life, although he has been abroad for large portions of 2009-2012.Frederik Seidelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16778438463117500605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-30032862262575166482010-10-31T22:27:28.643+00:002010-10-31T22:27:28.643+00:00I never ever pronounce prevalent with a stress on ...I never ever pronounce <i>prevalent</i> with a stress on the second syllable and when I hear such a thing, I shudder as if by epileptic seizure.<br /><br /><b>John Wells (in his above blog entry): <i>"In English adjectives ending in the suffix -ant or -ent we still see the ghost of the Latin stress rule."</i></b><br /><br />Oddly enough, the idea of "ghost remnants" left by substrate languages inspires a connection to Beeke's "Pre-Greek" etyma. Could Classical Greek likewise contain "ghosts" of Minoan stress rules? As they say, history repeats itself. Just an idle idea for other paleoglots out there to ponder on.<br /><br /><b>Sili: <i>"Never attribute malice where stupidity may suffice."</i></b><br /><br />I used to believe this adage until I realized that stupidity can be a form of malice too. To persist with ignorance is to have contempt for others and their valuable time.<br /><br />Conversely, malice is certainly a form of stupidity since there's simply no point in it.<br /><br />Ergo, the dichotomy between stupidity and malice is a nonsensical myth, often promoted rather ironically by other trolls to guilt people into feeling ashamed for calling a stupid person stupid.Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-28265028028888579292010-10-29T19:48:51.782+01:002010-10-29T19:48:51.782+01:00"Surely a troll. I mean it must be... right&q...<em>"Surely a troll. I mean it must be... right"</em><br />More likely a crackpot. "Never attribute malice where stupidity may suffice."<br /><br />I've been the /pri'veɪlənt/ camp, myself, and I still tend slip on it occasionally.<br /><br />As it happens I'm a chemist (if a failed one). (And a NNS.)Jens Knudsen (Sili)https://www.blogger.com/profile/14078875730565068352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-31598006690194417392010-10-29T04:01:34.566+01:002010-10-29T04:01:34.566+01:00I enjoyed your radio interviews John.I enjoyed your radio interviews John.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-35535370304394181872010-10-28T23:31:11.542+01:002010-10-28T23:31:11.542+01:00This American has only heard 'ex,ponent. I sa...This American has only heard <i>'ex,ponent</i>. I say <i>com'ponent</i>, but I've often heard <i>'com,ponent</i>, and I knew one person who said <i>'component</i> (the way I say "competent").Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01732684010036577968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-52630123776657626332010-10-28T19:18:40.526+01:002010-10-28T19:18:40.526+01:00@David Crosbie:
Thanks@David Crosbie:<br />ThanksKrauthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11932831673529849848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-76043846297304449222010-10-28T19:06:18.967+01:002010-10-28T19:06:18.967+01:00I have deleted Clayton Burns's further comment...I have deleted Clayton Burns's further comment as even less relevant than the preceding ones.John Wellshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-34867559435714219992010-10-28T18:17:42.668+01:002010-10-28T18:17:42.668+01:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Clayton Burnsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-85594147285476805382010-10-28T17:57:03.988+01:002010-10-28T17:57:03.988+01:00Kraut
The two interviews were aired this morning....Kraut<br /><br />The two interviews were aired this morning. If you go to the BBC iPlayer page for the Radio Four Today Programme http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9133000/9133928.stm and the radio Five Breakfast programme http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vhjsm you can listen. At least you can listen if you're in the UK. I don't promise that you can from elsewhere.<br /><br />These are long programmes, but you can select your starting point.<br /><br />For Radio Four Today <br />1. this separate link http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9135000/9135095.stm<br />2. the above link starting at 2:19.26<br /><br />For Radio Five Breakfast<br />the above link starting at 2:24.55David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-27995556743500915672010-10-28T17:27:19.672+01:002010-10-28T17:27:19.672+01:00John,
when will the interviews be aired?John,<br />when will the interviews be aired?Krauthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11932831673529849848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-41321694695814204882010-10-28T12:34:26.775+01:002010-10-28T12:34:26.775+01:00I think Clayton Burns ought to have been thanked b...I think Clayton Burns ought to have been thanked by us for his contribution, oughtn't he to have been? Some people here might say "Those things needn't have been mentioned here, needn't they have been?" But we all may sometimes wander off topic, mayn't we? There may be some who daren't, but there always used to be odd comments cropping up here, usen't there?Paul Carleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-4512261809717428452010-10-28T04:13:45.412+01:002010-10-28T04:13:45.412+01:00@ Ella: I've never heard either one of those h...@ Ella: I've never heard either one of those here in America.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-69618338499840211872010-10-28T03:53:39.898+01:002010-10-28T03:53:39.898+01:00This is intuition only, but I think that priˈveɪlə...This is intuition only, but I think that priˈveɪlənt (or possibly prəˈveɪlənt) may be variations that are more commonly found in AmE.ellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036209994244477176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-4524399094569292972010-10-27T23:22:04.567+01:002010-10-27T23:22:04.567+01:00If I saw prevalent where I would expect prevailing...If I saw <i>prevalent</i> where I would expect <i>prevailing</i> ("prevalent winds", for example), I might tend to give it penultimate stress. Similarly, I gave <i>impious</i> penultimate stress for years, obviously by analogy with <i>pious</i>, until I happened to hear my father say it.<br /><br />You omit the <i>muta cum liquida</i> exception, which gives us <i>ˈtenebrous</i> rather than <i>teˈnebrous</i>, because a stop followed by <i>l</i> or <i>r</i> did not make the preceding syllable heavy in Latin. This rule was lost in Vulgar Latin, which is why Spanish has <i>teniebla</i> 'darkness' < <i>tenebra</i> rather than <i>tínebla</i> or the like.John Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452247999156925669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-4526185441678937462010-10-27T21:54:37.737+01:002010-10-27T21:54:37.737+01:00ˈdecadent or alternatively deˈcadent - this, as ma...ˈdecadent or alternatively deˈcadent - this, as maybe some others, is more complex because of the double origin from Latin and French, which might explain some cases of seemingly exceptional stress.Phillip Mindenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16801818752833289089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-66143919254676052762010-10-27T21:22:34.082+01:002010-10-27T21:22:34.082+01:00@Clayton Burns:
Perhaps your thoughts would be bet...@Clayton Burns:<br />Perhaps your thoughts would be better expressed as posts on a blog of your own than as comments on somebody else's blog.mollymoolynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-47244128985470193132010-10-27T20:55:37.193+01:002010-10-27T20:55:37.193+01:00Surely a troll. I mean it must be... right?Surely a troll. I mean it must be... right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-81346723063704433822010-10-27T20:55:19.987+01:002010-10-27T20:55:19.987+01:00vp: can i out-question-mark you? probably not. pv....vp: can i out-question-mark you? probably not. pv.Clayton Burnsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-34245376687333506682010-10-27T18:56:10.991+01:002010-10-27T18:56:10.991+01:00@Clayton Burns:
!?!?!?!?!?@Clayton Burns:<br /><br />!?!?!?!?!?vphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16647609487352038948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-40453441472507881082010-10-27T17:52:32.251+01:002010-10-27T17:52:32.251+01:00My rule for English as an international language i...My rule for English as an international language is that we should avoid proliferating forms. <br /><br />For example, I have expelled "ought to" from my little box of modals: "can, may, might, must, could, should, would, will."<br /><br />I need a clean list because I have composed a set of 60 verb elements of the past, including 15 sentences containing modals in a past context (based on "might, had to, could, should, would") with an active, passive, and continuous "past modal" inside a sentence following the pattern: 1.report verb, or adjective, or noun: 2.past modal: 3.conditional, purpose, reason, or result clause: "I knew I had to work like hell to avoid being seen as a slacker." <br /><br />Unless you create four memory pages for 1.tenses and voices, including present and past perfects 2.past modals 3.modal past perfects 4.non-finites in a past context, students will never master instant recognition of the forms and attain facility with the past in composition and speech. <br /><br />I think that professors of phonetics should center their work in describing and analyzing the sound system(s) of English in "Macbeth" and an official database of 40 lyrics from 1600-1900 (the very best poem for sound symbolism is "The Sick Rose"). American pronunciation per www.m-w.com is an ideal target. In reading "Macbeth," we clicked on the LDOCE 5th "hurlyburly." This will not do at all. We went immediately to www.m-w.com and got a superior pronunciation. <br /><br />I would strongly recommend that you provide good targets for students and stay well away from bizarre pronunciations. British English has far too many ins and outs that are better suited to the circus than serious work.Clayton Burnsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-72585227354982002412010-10-27T11:20:55.605+01:002010-10-27T11:20:55.605+01:00Correction: ACG actually gave equal stress (ˈæmbɪˈ...Correction: ACG actually gave equal stress (<b>ˈæmbɪˈveɪlənt</b>).<br /><br />I should also say that the <em>OED</em> transcription is equivalent to IPA <b>æmˈbɪvələnt</b>.Steve Doerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11410868047916610730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-34048500269189467062010-10-27T11:11:32.836+01:002010-10-27T11:11:32.836+01:00ˌæmbɪˈveɪlənt was formerly the preferred pronuncia...<b>ˌæmbɪˈveɪlənt</b> was formerly the preferred pronunciation in the 'Daniel Jones' dictionary (certainly in the 13th edition by A. C. Gimson), but had disappeared by the 15th edition. The word was <b>(æmbi·vǎlĕnt)</b> in the 1933 supplement to the <em>OED</em>.Steve Doerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11410868047916610730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-64701330821848412022010-10-27T10:51:06.590+01:002010-10-27T10:51:06.590+01:00I'm with Ted.I'm with Ted.Michael Eversonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16882679137179765872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-52913060515168269362010-10-27T10:26:35.209+01:002010-10-27T10:26:35.209+01:00I haven't heard ˌæmbɪˈveɪlənt or priˈveɪlənt, ...I haven't heard ˌæmbɪˈveɪlənt or priˈveɪlənt, prə-. Maybe I will one day.Tednoreply@blogger.com