en(t)ertaining

[Francois]

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

FRC

 

[Casiopea]

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].

 

[Francois]

In the same vein, do you say "inneresting" in AE ?

FRC

 

[Casiopea]

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,

 

[blacknomi]

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.

 

[Francois]

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

 

[twostep]

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:

 

[Francois]

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

 

[blacknomi]

Really? You meant it's a regional accent. I didn't know that since I heard lots of native speakers here say so. :lol: And my pronunciation has been sloppier for a while. 8)

 

[Casiopea]

Really? You meant it's a regional accent. I didn't know that since I heard lots of native speakers here say so. :lol: 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)

 

[Tdol]

You'll hear the 't' dropped in the UK too.;-)

 

[twostep]

You'll hear the 't' dropped in the UK too.;-)

What strikes me as an oddity is the pronounciation of Atlanta. Natives or better residents as it is a rather transient metropolis, emphasis the "T". do not worry, otherwise Southernese, unaware of that letter, prevails.