English Pronunciation

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CitySpeak

Guest
There is more to consider when learning and teaching English pronunciation than simply phonemic accuracy.


Would anyone like to comment?

Does anyone have any questions?
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
If the other person understands the other, then the primary goal has been achieved. Niceties come later, but there has to be sufficient accuracy for communication, otherwise it's a waste of time. ;-)
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
tdol said:
If the other person understands the other, then the primary goal has been achieved. Niceties come later, but there has to be sufficient accuracy for communication, otherwise it's a waste of time. ;-)


I'll get back to this later.


Could you please elaborate a bit on what you mean by "niceties" in this case?

Thanks,

:shock: 8) :)
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Basic comprehensibility must come first, then we can worry about rising and falling intonation with tag questions. ;-)
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
tdol said:
Basic comprehensibility must come first, then we can worry about rising and falling intonation with tag questions. ;-)


Ah of course. I understand that and agree. But I'm not exactly driving at that sort of thing.


One thing I'm thinking about here is natural stress patterns, as well as natural intonation patterns. There's more. More later I think.


I've snuck back to the pc. I have to go back downstairs before I'm caught.


:shock: 8)
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Caught? ;-)
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
CitySpeak said:
There is more to consider when learning and teaching English pronunciation than simply phonemic accuracy.


Would anyone like to comment?

Does anyone have any questions?

Question: What do you mean by 'phonemic accuracy'? :D
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
Casiopea said:
CitySpeak said:
There is more to consider when learning and teaching English pronunciation than simply phonemic accuracy.


Would anyone like to comment?

Does anyone have any questions?

Question: What do you mean by 'phonemic accuracy'? :D


the ability to make the individual sounds of letters and letter combinations in the correct way - I think there is more to good pronunciation than simply being able to produce the sounds correctly.

I read "phonemic accuracy" on a document or site. I find it to be a useful term when talking about pronunciation. Understanding more about pronunciation can help one to hear and understand English better in some cases.

More later.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=phoneme

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=phonemic


http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q="phonemic+accuracy"&FORM=SMCRT
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Would you include weak and stressed forms in that, or would they be part of your wider picture? ;-)
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
tdol said:
Would you include weak and stressed forms in that, or would they be part of your wider picture? ;-)

I believe with "phonemes" we are just talking about the sounds themselves. Knowing which part of a word is stressed and which part is weak is something else. I've got lists of heteronyms to deal with that.

The "wider picture" would have more to do with segments.

I hear too many things like "I CAN DO IT." When it really should be, "I c'nduwit."

I can do it. = Ic'n duwit.

That's just one example.

I_c'n_OP'n the_CAN. = I can open the can.

Timed Stress - Linking/Connected Speech - Schwa/Neutral/Altered Vowel Sounds

More later, should anyone care for it.

8) :shock:


By the way, capitals mean full stress. We would typically use capitals for content words as well. I've chosen to use lower case for the non-stressed part of content words. Also, ' is used to indicate schwa vowel sounds. The lines indicate linking. No line means there is a stop. Words that are linked are really one word.
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
CitySpeak said:
I hear too many things like "I CAN DO IT." When it really should be, "I c'nduwit."

I can do it. = Ic'n duwit.

Two of my favorites:

It's not, phonetically It's not, and
Do you want to, phonetically Ja'wanna.

:D
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
I like 'cudja' (could you) and 'wudja' (would you). ;-)
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
I understand what both of you are saying, but I would classify those examples under "informal and colloquial pronunciation". There is linking which applies to both formal and informal types of speaking. The informal and colloquial type of linking has more to do with word reduction. I believe there is only so much reduction that occurs in informal and colloquial pronunciation, and it most always occurs with function/grammar words. Just the same, that'll be covered in the course as well.

Consonant reduction for connected speech mostly occurs in colloquial and informal types of speaking.

Vowel reduction occurs in both formal and informal discourse.

Once in a while there is no vowel reduction where one might expect it. This would be for emphasis most of the time. And I would refer to it as "paralanguage", as it would be a deviation from the normal stress and intonation patterns of English. This much I can say for AE. I think it would, generally speaking, work the same way with other English accents as well.
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
I would say "It 'snot" for "It's not" is a normal part of linking in rapid speech whether it's formal/standard or informal/colloquial.


It works the same way for "an apple", which is really "a napple".
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
Once in a while there is no vowel reduction where one might expect it. This would be for emphasis most of the time. <<

But some times vowel reduction is simply optional, such as in the words "candidate" and "for". This could have to do with personal speaking style and preference. It could also have much to do with how fast someone is speaking.
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
There is a lot of personal choice- how many syllables do you put in 'interestingly'? I'd go for 4, but you do hear 5. ;-)
 
C

CitySpeak

Guest
tdol said:
There is a lot of personal choice- how many syllables do you put in 'interestingly'? I'd go for 4, but you do hear 5. ;-)


Yes, there is a lot of personal choice.

Still, the main idea here is to help people with English pronunciation.

As for "interestingly", I'd say it depends on when I'm speaking. Who knows? However it comes out is how it comes out - interestingly enough.

Bom dia,
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
tdol said:
There is a lot of personal choice- how many syllables do you put in 'interestingly'? I'd go for 4, but you do hear 5. ;-)

in*ter*est*ing*ly

Hm. That looks like five syllables to me. I rarely have occasion to use the word myself. (I was going to say never, but I think I used the word once.) I think you are more likely to see it in print than hear it. It is an odd word. It is like telling everyone they will be interested in what you are about to say.

:)
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
tdol said:
There is a lot of personal choice- how many syllables do you put in 'interestingly'? I'd go for 4, but you do hear 5. ;-)


in'ter'es'ting'ly enough, you're right.
in'tres'ting'ly enough, you're right. ('e' is deleted)

:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top