Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: en(t)ertaining

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,369
    Post Thanks / Like

    en(t)ertaining

    I believe the first 't' is not always actually pronounced in AE, much like 'twenty' or 'printer'. Is that correct?

    FRC

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: en(t)ertaining

    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    I believe the first 't' is not always actually pronounced in AE, much like 'twenty' or 'printer'. Is that correct?

    FRC
    Yup. That's correct. The sound process by which the sequence of sounds /nt/ becomes [nn] is called progressive assimilation:

    entertainment => ennertainment
    twenty => twenny
    printer => prinner

    The Why:
    [n] and [t] share the same place of articulation but differ in manner of articulation: [n] is a nasal sound (air passes through the nose), whereas [t] is an oral sound (air passes through the mouth). In terms of ease of speech, it's easier to maintain [n] than to stop and change manner to [t]. That is, [nn] is more preferred in terms of economy than is [nt].

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    In the same vein, do you say "inneresting" in AE ?

    FRC

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    In the same vein, do you say "inneresting" in AE ?

    FRC
    Speakers are known to pronounce it that way, yes. :)

    Similarily, unbelievable => unbelievable ~ umbelievable. The sounds "m" and "b" share a labial (i.e. lip) feature, whereas "n" and "b" do not.

    There's also, supposedly => suppozedly => suppozubly (-ub as in tub). /s/ is pronounced as [z] intervocalically (i.e. between two voiced sounds). /e/, a lax vowel, is neutralized to a wedge, for which I've used "u" to symbolize. "d" changes to the sound "b" by a process called progressive assimilation. That is, "b" and "p" share a labial feature.

    supposedly ~ supposebly

    All the best,

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,814
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    In the same vein, do you say "inneresting" in AE ?

    FRC
    That's an intresting histry. :)

    What's the phonological rule being applied here?
    AH! I remembered it's segment-deletion. The deletion of a reduced vowel from certain phonetic contexts.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    Similarily, unbelievable => unbelievable ~ umbelievable. The sounds "m" and "b" share a labial (i.e. lip) feature, whereas "n" and "b" do not.

    There's also, supposedly => suppozedly => suppozubly (-ub as in tub). /s/ is pronounced as [z] intervocalically (i.e. between two voiced sounds). /e/, a lax vowel, is neutralized to a wedge, for which I've used "u" to symbolize. "d" changes to the sound "b" by a process called progressive assimilation. That is, "b" and "p" share a labial feature.

    supposedly ~ supposebly
    I didn't know that.

    FRC

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    727
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote="blacknomi"]
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    In the same vein, do you say "inneresting" in AE ?

    FRC
    That's an intresting histry. :)

    What's the phonological rule being applied here?
    AH! I remembered it's segment-deletion. The deletion of a reduced vowel from certain phonetic contexts.[/quote

    The further South you go below the Mason-Dixon Line the more you will encounter this almost sloppy pronounciation. Y'all are in Dixie :wink:

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    I believe it's fairly common, and not particularly sloppy. Now, that's true that there's a wide variety of regional accents in the US, more or less "typical". For example, the Boston area accent sometimes sounds weird when you're not used to it ;)

    FRC

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,814
    Post Thanks / Like
    Really? You meant it's a regional accent. I didn't know that since I heard lots of native speakers here say so. And my pronunciation has been sloppier for a while. 8)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by blacknomi
    Really? You meant it's a regional accent. I didn't know that since I heard lots of native speakers here say so. And my pronunciation has been sloppier for a while. 8)
    All languages have those kinds of sound characteristics. It's universal. It has to do with ease of speech; the way sounds behave. 8)

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •