[General] Pronunciation of "months" and "shrimp."

Status
Not open for further replies.

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
For "months" just forget about the "th" and say "munce" (rhymes with "once"). There will be those on this board who tell you that is wrong, but no native speaker will notice the difference.
I'm not one of those. Many native speakers say it that way (munce), even I do. I also say mon[θ]s.

It's convincing my students that a) and b), below, have the same pronunciation that proves difficult, as students seem to have been conditioned to believe otherwise:


a) clothes
b) close
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5jj

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I'm not one of those. Many native speakers say it that way (munce), even I do. I also say mon[θ]s.

It's convincing my students that a) and b), below, have the same pronunciation that proves difficult, as students seem to have been conditioned to believe otherwise:


a) clothes
b) close
I think I sometimes pronounce "clothes" like "cloves" (/vz/ doesn't make me do this difficult movement of the tongue that I would have to do to in /ðz/). Do native speakers do this often?
 

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
I think I sometimes pronounce "clothes" like "cloves" (/vz/ doesn't make me do this difficult movement of the tongue that I would have to do to in /ðz/). Do native speakers do this often?
Native speakers compensate by omitting /ð/, giving clo[z] (which has the same pronunciation as close, as in close the door). The pronunciation clo[vz] is non-native.


______________
Your pronunciation tells me a little bit about your native language:


  • It has complex consonants (CC), which is why you don't add schwa between the CCs (as do, say, Japanese speakers of English whose language does not permit CCs).


  • It does not have dental /ð/, which is why you opt for the closest sound, labio-dental [v].
 

TheNewOne

Junior Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Russian Federation
Current Location
Russian Federation
NikkiBarber
Saying "munce" is a real way out for me too ;-)
I like to speak fast in Russian so people ask me to slow down and I want to speak fast in English, but this th problem slows me down a little bit.
lauralie2
I'm gonna use clothes=close :-D

BTW, sometimes I hear that some native speakers pronounce the th sound as /f/. What can you say about this?
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Native speakers compensate by omitting /ð/, giving clo[z] (which has the same pronunciation as close, as in close the door). The pronunciation clo[vz] is non-native.


______________
Your pronunciation tells me a little bit about your native language:


  • It has complex consonants (CC), which is why you don't add schwa between the CCs (as do, say, Japanese speakers of English whose language does not permit CCs).


  • It does not have dental /ð/, which is why you opt for the closest sound, labio-dental [v].
You're right about both things but I'm wondering how you could guess it from such a tiny piece of information... :shock:

We don't have phonemic schwas in Polish, that's true. (I think the record holder is "bezwzględny", which has a five-phoneme consonant cluster /zvzgl/.) But I don't understand how my pronunciation of this particular lets you guess it. Don't you pronounce "cloves" without a schwa too?

As for dental consonants, we don't have them. But again, I'm not sure how my pronunciation of "clothes" reveals this fact. I don't have any problem at all with /ð/ in most words. It's only diificult for me to pronounce in "clothes", as is for everybody I think...
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I'm not one of those. Many native speakers say it that way (munce), even I do. I also say mon[θ]s.

It's convincing my students that a) and b), below, have the same pronunciation that proves difficult, as students seem to have been conditioned to believe otherwise:


a) clothes
b) close

a) and b) do not have the same pronunciation, not even close. Even if one doesn't stress the th sound, they have different final sounds, z and s.
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I just now realized that lauralie2 meant the verb "close", not the adjective. What I wrote before pertains to the adjective.

But even the verb "close" has a different pronunciation than "clothes". They both end with a z sound, but "clothes" of course has the "th" sound in it's full pronunciation.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I just now realized that lauralie2 meant the verb "close", not the adjective. What I wrote before pertains to the adjective.

But even the verb "close" has a different pronunciation than "clothes". They both end with a z sound, but "clothes" of course has the "th" sound in it's full pronunciation.
No.
lauralie is right, for most of us at least - in normal, informal conversation, 'clothes' is pronounced in the same way as 'close' (verb).
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
No.
lauralie is right, for most of us at least - in normal, informal conversation, 'clothes' is pronounced in the same way as 'close' (verb).
Are you actually saying that most of you deliberately pronounce "clothes" the exact same way as "close", taking care not to include even a hint of a th sound? That's what it sounds like you are saying.

And I don't know why any English teacher would want to try to convince her students that the pronunciation of "clothes" and "close" is the same, when they are not the same.
Students "have been conditioned to believe" that there is a difference in the pronunciation of the two words because there is a difference.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Are you actually saying that most of you deliberately pronounce "clothes" the exact same way as "close", taking care not to include even a hint of a th sound? That's what it sounds like you are saying. No, we don't take care to do it - it just happens.

And I don't know why any English teacher would want to try to convince her students that the pronunciation of "clothes" and "close" is the same, when they are not the same. A careful pronunciation of 'clothes' is of course not the same as that of 'close'. However, the word 'clothes' is frequently pronounced/kləʊz/(BrE, ) /kloʊz/[FONT=&quot](AmE) by [/FONT]native speakers in normal conversation. This is confirmed in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary, in which J C Wells which records what people say, rather than what they think they say.

Students "have been conditioned to believe" that there is a difference in the pronunciation of the two words because there is a difference. There may be in your pronunciation of the two words. Fine.
5
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
1 2006
2 fivejedjon
3 2006

Originally Posted by 2006
Are you actually saying that most of you deliberately pronounce "clothes" the exact same way as "close", taking care not to include even a hint of a th sound? That's what it sounds like you are saying. No, we don't take care to do it - it just happens.

And I don't know why any English teacher would want to try to convince her students that the pronunciation of "clothes" and "close" is the same, when they are not the same.
A careful pronunciation of 'clothes' is of course not the same as that of 'close'. That's what I've been saying, and there's no reason pronunciation shouldn't be careful.
However, the word 'clothes' is frequently pronounced/kləʊz/(BrE, ) /kloʊz/[FONT=&quot](AmE) by [/FONT]native speakers in normal conversation. This is confirmed in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary, in which J C Wells which records what people say, rather than what they think they say. Your implication is that I think I and others say "clothes" but you know that we say "close'". Students "have been conditioned to believe" that there is a difference in the pronunciation of the two words because there is a difference. There may be in your pronunciation of the two words. It's not just me Fine.

I hope to have nothing more to say about "clothes" and "close".
 

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
You're right about both things but I'm wondering how you could guess it from such a tiny piece of information... :shock:
Vowel epenthesis is common in the world's languages.


Don't you pronounce "cloves" without a schwa too?
I pronounce 'cloves (the spice)' as clo[vz], as do other native English speakers. The sounds [v] and [z] do not share the same place of articulation; if they did, I would insert an epenthetic vowel; e.g., "rose", plural ro[zɨz].


With the word "clothes" clo[ðz],

if you cannot pronounce [ð], then you will adopt the closest sound that you know; e.g., [v] (giving, clo[vz]) or [z] (giving clo[z[FONT=Arial Unicode MS,code2000,lucida sans unicode]ɪ[/FONT]z] or clo[ziz] with an epenthetic vowel sharing place of articulation with [z]).


if you can pronounce [ð], but are not used to pronouncing consonant clusters, then "clothes" becomes clo[ð[FONT=Arial Unicode MS,code2000,lucida sans unicode]ɪ[/FONT]z] or clo[ð[FONT=Arial Unicode MS,code2000,lucida sans unicode]i[/FONT]z], wherein an epenthetic vowel is inserted between [ð] and [FONT=Arial Unicode MS,code2000,lucida sans unicode][[/FONT]z] to make pronunciation more manageable.


In your case, the key is that your pronunciation of [ð] is too close to that of [z], and so when the two occur together in a cluster (as in clo[ðz] "clothes"), dis-assimilation takes place: [ð] becomes [v], a sound that is farther away from [z], but close to [ð], which gives a more manageable pronunciation, clo[vz].

Your pronunciation of "clothes" (clo[vz]) interests me. Do you ever pronounce it as clo[fs]? The reason I ask, Polish <v> and <z> are pronounced [f] and word-finally. Is Polish your first language?
 

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
...the verb "close" has a different pronunciation than "clothes". They both end with a z sound, but "clothes" of course has the "th" sound in it's full pronunciation.
Let's clarify.


The noun "clothes" has two pronunciations, the second one of which has the same pronunciation as the verb 'close':


"clothes" <noun>

  1. clo[ðz] :tick: "I like your clothes."
  2. clo[z] :tick: "I like your clothes"


"close" <verb>

  1. clo[z] :tick: "Close the door."
 

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
Students "have been conditioned to believe" that there is a difference in the pronunciation of the two words because there is a difference.
Yes, that's exactly what it is: conditioning. There is most definitely a difference (clo[ð]z). There is also a similarity (clo[z]), which was not an option to language purists way back then...in the days of old. Welcome to the 21st century, dearest 2006!
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Vowel epenthesis is common in the world's languages.


I pronounce 'cloves (the spice)' as clo[vz], as do other native English speakers. The sounds [v] and [z] do not share the same place of articulation; if they did, I would insert an epenthetic vowel; e.g., "rose", plural ro[zɨz].
I still don't understand... You said my pronunciation of "clothes" as clo[vz] made you think we don't have schwas in Polish. But there is no schwa in "cloves" in English too... I guess what you wrote next explains your reasoning:

With the word "clothes" clo[ðz],

if you cannot pronounce [ð], then you will adopt the closest sound that you know; e.g., [v] (giving, clo[vz]) or [z] (giving clo[zɪz] or clo[ziz] with an epenthetic vowel sharing place of articulation with [z]).


if you can pronounce [ð], but are not used to pronouncing consonant clusters, then "clothes" becomes clo[ðɪz] or clo[ðiz], wherein an epenthetic vowel is inserted between [ð] and [z] to make pronunciation more manageable.
The problem is that it doesn't work this way in my case. I can pronounce [ð] as native speakers do. Indeed, many Poles have trouble with this sound and make [d], [z] or [v] out of it. (Perhaps they do make it voiceless word-finally sometimes.) I, however, was taught the sound as a child and have no problem with it. But I am a Pole, so I am used to pronouncing consonant clusters. As I said I must be able to pronounce five consonants in a row without a schwa. (Of course, I can't pronounce every long consonant cluster. :)) In fact, I am able to pronounce "clothes" as clo[ðz], without a schwa. I may even do this in real life sometimes, I'm not sure. But surely, I don't do that often, as it requires too much effort.

In your case, the key is that your pronunciation of [ð] is too close to that of [z], and so when the two occur together in a cluster (as in clo[ðz] "clothes"), dis-assimilation takes place: [ð] becomes [v], a sound that is farther away from [z], but close to [ð], which gives a more manageable pronunciation, clo[vz].
I don't think this is what happens. I'll try to explain what I think about my pronunciation of the word and give more details about it below.

Your pronunciation of "clothes" (clo[vz]) interests me. Do you ever pronounce it as clo[fs]? The reason I ask, Polish <v> and <z> are pronounced [f] and word-finally. Is Polish your first language?
Yes, Polish is my native language. Please note that I may not be a typical Polish English speaker. I have a long experience speaking and listening to English and have studied the language for a long time.

You're right. In Polish, voiced consonants become voiceless word-finally. And I do notice this in my English pronunciation but only marginally. I have been trained not to do this. I must say here that this is not a major problem for a native Polish speaker when they learn English. It's relatively easy to overcome. Dental consonants, for example, cause much more trouble.

Since you're interested in my pronunciation of "clothes", I'll give you my thoughts on it, along with some more details.

First of all, my problem with pronouncing it like "close" does not lie in the sound of it. I know native speakers pronounce it this way and when I hear it I understand easily and don't find it "jarring" in any way. The problem is that I have this need of doing something between the vowel and and the [z]. I'm not sure where this need originates but I know for sure that I find it awkward to pronounce the word "clothes" like "close" without even marking the [ð]. It's not about sound, it's about movement - I need to assure myself that I'm trying to pronounce the [ð].

Seemingly, I do this in several ways. (Note that I might be making the following stuff up. This is what I think now.) If I want to use my tongue, I must do it quickly---to be able to move it to the position of [z] afterwards without uttering a schwa (I would find a schwa very awkward there.) This haste may result in several sounds. I may pronounce a [d] if I just touch my teeth/gums quickly. I don't think I do it often, but it seems possible.

I may also give up pronouncing [ð] interdentally and do a dental approximant by placing the tip of my tongue very close behind my upper teeth. I think I do this.

Then, I may do the [v]. I don't think this is because of my first language. It's simply much easier than any of the above as it allows me to say this without any difficulty, as [v] does not involve my tongue, which can be ready to go to the [z] position immediately afterwards. (A schwa would remove the difficulty too, but as I said, I would never do a schwa there. Which doesn't mean that I don't understand the idea of the schwa or can't pronounce it where it's correct!) The [v] will be very weak---the lip will be quite far from the teeth (I don't know why)---and may even completely disappear in my speech. If it disappears, I do in fact pronounce clo[z]! But in my mind there's still a [v] in such cases. I think I pronounce the [v], but in fact my lip doesn't change its position. (I wonder if such a phenomenon has any name.)
 
Last edited:

NikkiBarber

Junior Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
Danish
Home Country
Denmark
Current Location
United States
Birdeen: How do you pronounce the Polish word for a city that in German is spelled "Stettin"? I stayed there and noticed that the Polish spelling of the word had a long row of consonants and almost no vowels. It would be impossible for me to even attempt to pronounce this.
Do you know this city and how the name is pronounced? I can't remember the spelling, I just remember seeing a cluster of Z's, S's and maybe C's.
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Birdeen: How do you pronounce the Polish word for a city that in German is spelled "Stettin"? I stayed there and noticed that the Polish spelling of the word had a long row of consonants and almost no vowels. It would be impossible for me to even attempt to pronounce this.
Do you know this city and how the name is pronounced? I can't remember the spelling, I just remember seeing a cluster of Z's, S's and maybe C's.
Of course, I know the city. :-D

Its Polish name is Szczecin. No wonder it's difficult for you to pronounce. The digraph "sz" stands for the voiceless retroflex fricative. "Cz" stands for the voiceless retroflex affricate. "Ci" stands for the voiceless alveolo-palatal affricate + (in this particular word).

Here's a sound sample from Wikipedia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Pl-Szczecin-2.ogg

Unfortunately the word is cut. There should be the [n] sound at the end.

If anybody is interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_Szczecin

But we're going far off-topic...
 
Last edited:

lauralie2

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
China
I still don't understand... You said my pronunciation of "clothes" as clo[vz] made you think we don't have schwas in Polish.
That your first language has consonant clusters is, I believe, what was said. The fact that you didn't insert an epenthetic vowel tells me your first language has consonant clusters. You are used to pronouncing clusters, which is why you don't insert a vowel between [ð] and [z].

...I am able to pronounce "clothes" as clo[ðz], without a schwa. I may even do this in real life sometimes, I'm not sure. But surely, I don't do that often, as it requires too much effort.
Exactly, which is why you simplify the cluster [ðz] by changing [ð] to [v], giving clo[vz], right?


I think I pronounce the [v], but in fact my lip doesn't change its position. (I wonder if such a phenomenon has any name.)
There might be a term for that; I just don't know what it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top