What is the word after "the owner and"

[svetlana14]

What is the word after "the owner and" in

0:24?

 

[emsr2d2]

proprietor

 

[svetlana14]

proprietor

But she does not say it like /prəˈpraɪətə(r)/, does not she? It is a kind of ch - sh - before er. Can you admit that it is blurred to something like /prəˈpraɪəʧə/ - a realization of Estuary speech?

 

[5jj]

Can you admit that it is blurred ...?

I am sure you did not intend this, but that appears as a rather combative way to pose the question.

 

[svetlana14]

I am sure you did not intend this, buat that appears as a rather comabative way to pose the question.

Ok. Sorry. Noted. It was not my intention - probably the word admit was not relevant.

 

[emsr2d2]

@svetlana14 When someone has quoted a part of one of your posts, please don't then edit the post and remove the quoted comment. It makes a nonsense of parts of the thread after that. I've reinstated the original post that 5jj was referring to.

And no, it's not "blurred" or unclear to a native speaker. However, if an English learner is unfamiliar with a particular word, it can always sound unclear on first hearing.

It's worth noting that what she says is somewhat tautologous. In business circumstances, the proprietor is the owner (and vice versa).

 

[svetlana14]

@svetlana14 When someone has quoted a part of one of your posts, please don't then edit the post and remove the quoted comment. It makes a nonsense of parts of the thread after that. I've reinstated the original post that 5jj was referring to.

And no, it's not "blurred" or unclear to a native speaker. However, if an English learner is unfamiliar with a particular word, it can always sound unclear on first hearing.

It's worth noting that what she says is somewhat tautologous. In business circumstances, the proprietor is the owner (and vice versa).

I’m familiar with the word “proprietor,” but I’m wondering if her pronunciation is somehow different from the standard phonetic transcription. Could you explain that to me? Also, it’s interesting that YouTube’s automatic subtitles don’t recognize the word either.

 

[emsr2d2]

Rachel Johnson is a bit posh but other than that, she says it exactly how I'd say it and how I'd expect any BrE speaker to say it:
Pruh-pry-uh-tuh (Sorry, I don't do phonetic symbols).

She takes a breath before "of" so you could say that the final "r" of "proprietor" isn't very audible, but that just makes it sound exactly like my pronunciation description above. If she'd not drawn breath, the two words would have sounded like "pruh-pry-uh-terov".

Both BrE recordings on Forvo (HERE) sound as I'd expect and as Rachel J said them.

 

[svetlana14]

@svetlana14 When someone has quoted a part of one of your posts, please don't then edit the post and remove the quoted comment. It makes a nonsense of parts of the thread after that. I've reinstated the original post that 5jj was referring to.

And no, it's not "blurred" or unclear to a native speaker. However, if an English learner is unfamiliar with a particular word, it can always sound unclear on first hearing.

It's worth noting that what she says is somewhat tautologous. In business circumstances, the proprietor is the owner (and vice versa).

I’m familiar with the word “proprietor,” but I’m wondering if her pronunciation is somehow different from the standard phonetic transcription. Could you explain that to me? Also, it’s interesting that YouTube’s automatic subtitles don’t recognize the word either.

I got so worried that I might have offended someone that I ended up deleting it — probably even more than I needed to.

 

[probus]

When @emsr2d2 says "a bit posh" I think she means that the speaker is using the old RP. In other words her accent is the same as that of King Charles and Queen Elizabeth II.

 

[jutfrank]

When @emsr2d2 says "a bit posh" I think she means that the speaker is using the old RP. In other words her accent is the same as that of King Charles and Queen Elizabeth II.

Not quite. emsr2d2 means that the woman is speaking with an upper middle class accent. This is not the same as how the royals speak.

 

[emsr2d2]

In case anyone didn't realise this, she's the younger sister of Boris Johnson, ex-Prime Minister, whose voice is even more "posh"! Wikipedia describe the family as upper-middle class, rather than upper class, potentially because both the parents worked, rather than "coming from money".

Off-topic (but worth it, in my opinion): While looking at the Johnson family history, I stumbled upon this rather hilarious explanation of the class system in the UK:

Lower working class: you have a TV from the 90s because that's all you can afford.

Middle working class: you have a really big and nice TV because you can afford it, but it takes up half your living room because you can't afford the house to go around it.

Upper working class: you have four TVs, one of which is in your rather spacious living room, the rest in your bedrooms.

Lower middle class: you have a TV. It's hidden by a cabinet for when company comes around. It's outnumbered by bookshelves.

Middle middle class: you have two TVs, neither in your living room. One is in the room you most likely refer to as ‘the den’ if you have children or ‘the cinema room’ if you don't, the other is black and white, 10 inches across, and you have it in your kitchen, mostly for display.

Upper middle class: TVs are vulgar, you would never dream of owning such a thing, you read The Times instead.

Lower upper class: you have no need for a TV because you barely leave the golf club anyway, besides, TVs are a bad investment that depreciate quickly in value.

Middle upper class: of course you have a TV, they aren't vulgar because you say so, and, because you say so, your favourite show will be on earlier tonight. It feels good to be in charge.

Upper upper class: you appear on TV once a year, at Christmas, to give your speech.