imprecise language

[Ice]

So, you're not the least bit uncomfortable when you hear G.W. Bush say "nucular". Well, that's you then.

No - I don't listen to a thing he has to say, so his pronunciation is of no consequence to me

I grew up in Queens, New York, not London. In these parts, people might say "tree" instead of "three". They might say "dese", "dem" and "dose" instead of "these", "them", and "those". We call that a Brooklyn accent. Still, there are many that grow up in Brooklyn and they learn to pronounce words properly. I admire good speech, and I don't admire poor speech, or, as in the title of this thread, imprecise speech. I don't say that a person is a dunce merely because he (or she) lacks linguistic accuracy. But what DOES it say about them? Nothing very positive.

Again I refer to my comments about Northeners saying 'cassle' instead of 'castle'. So by your way of thinking there is nothing positive to be said for any Northerners because they lack 'linguistic accuracy'?? Sorry but I don't hold with this view

 

[ruby]

No - I don't listen to a thing he has to say, so his pronunciation is of no consequence to me


Again I refer to my comments about Northeners saying 'cassle' instead of 'castle'. So by your way of thinking there is nothing positive to be said for any Northerners because they lack 'linguistic accuracy'?? Sorry but I don't hold with this view

Ice your so right about us Northeners though! we do say cassle instead of castle

 

[Libre]

<<Again I refer to my comments about Northeners saying 'cassle' instead of 'castle'. So by your way of thinking there is nothing positive to be said for any Northerners because they lack 'linguistic accuracy'?? Sorry but I don't hold with this view >>

Ice - that's not what I said. I did not say that "there is nothing positive to be said for any Northerners because they lack 'linguistic accuracy". I said that a lack of linguistic accuracy says nothing postive about the speaker. Check my post. Can you see the difference between what I said and what you thought I said?

There are pronounciations that are correct and there are pronounciations that are incorrect. Merely because someone has a regional accent does not make their pronounciation incorrect. I never said so.

Simply because I can understand what someone is saying does not make their pronounciation correct - or their grammar or vocabulary, either.

 

[Ice]

There are pronounciations that are correct and there are pronounciations that are incorrect. Merely because someone has a regional accent does not make their pronounciation incorrect. I never said so.

Simply because I can understand what someone is saying does not make their pronounciation correct - or their grammar or vocabulary, either.

Ah but 'cassle' is technically wrong - the 't' should not be silent - so would you say their pronunciation was correct or incorrect? I personally would say it is incorrect, but I wouldn't say they had poor linguistic accuracy because of it - maybe I have a higher tolerance. As long as I understand the meaning I don't mind how people talk One thing that really annoys me however is text speak - it can take me forever to decipher a text if people use text speak!

 

[leckert]

I'm not sure I go along with this. Educated people speak a certain way, for the most part. If you mangle words and especially if you use them imprecisely, you will be grouped with the dunces.

I can't get comfortable with the fact that George W. Bush can't correctly pronounce nuclear, and consistently says "nookyouler". I think he should at least learn how to say the names of the weapons, with which he could wipe out all life on Earth.

Here is exactly what you said, Libre.

You are saying that anyone with an accent is a dunce, or will at least be "grouped with the dunces."

I am glad there are so many dunces in the world! If everyone spoke the "perfect Queen's English", what a boring world we would live in!

I think I would rather hear a southern drawl, and someone say "Noocyoular" than to hear someone stiffly enunciating every "g" and "t" with painful and needless accuracy.

Our speech is part of what makes us individuals. Why would you want to quash that? Being born and raised in a particular culture wherein words are enunciated "incorrectly" does not mean you are stupid, or under-educated, or somehow inferior. It just means that you have a cultural background.

obtain some grippage, and let people express themselves.

just a suggestion.

 

[Kookamoor]

Oh, Libre. You should *never* have a verbal conversation with me!! I used to have a *very* broad Australian accent, and while it is a little diminished now it's still fairly strong. To people in North America and the UK it sounds like I add extra vowels and extra syllables. For example 'four' is pronounced 'for-wa' and thirteen, fourteen, fifteen are pronounced thirDeen, fourDeen, fifDeen. Sure, I can speak with inunciation if I want to, and my public speaking/professional voice is substantially different to my natural accent. But the reality of the matter is that when I'm comfortable with people I will relax and speak with my native accent. This doesn't make me uneducated, it's just the way I was brought up to speak.

Now if I *spelled* the words incorrectly (free for three, thirdeen for thirteen) that would perhaps imply that my education was lacking.

I guess everyone has their own first impressions, though. Personally, I base an awful lot about a person's character by what they wear and how they walk. But that's getting off topic, isn't it .

 

[Libre]

Here is exactly what you said, Libre.

You are saying that anyone with an accent is a dunce, or will at least be "grouped with the dunces."

Not at all. In fact I specifically excluded accents - but in a later post.
But it's right there for you. I said <<If you mangle words and especially if you use them imprecisely, you will be grouped with the dunces.>>

So, what does this mean? Does mangling words refer to accents? Clearly not.
I should take a moment to add (rather to REPEAT) that merely because someone speaks poorly does not automatically make them a dunce.

The title of this thread is "Imprecise Language".
Precise listening is as important as precise speaking.

 

[leckert]

In my small mind, clipping the "g" off of "-ing" and replacing "t" with "d" are regional, dialectal accents. I interpreted that you frowned on this sort of speech.

My contention is that if we all spoke a stiff, "proper" language, the world would lose its flavor.

 

[Libre]

Look - all I'm saying is that I admire good speech. I'm not saying everyone should talk the same way, or that regional accents are indicative of anything negative.
Don't we draw inferences from someone's dress? Their grooming? Their personal hygene? It doesn't mean that everyone must wear the same style or have the same haircut.

 

[claire29]

On this topic maybe people should check out Eats, Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss. It's quite funny to read the many examples of incorrect punctuation. I have to admit I am probably guilty of hundreds because grammar wasn't taught to me in the same way as it used to be. I'm also reading a similar title right now called Lost for Words by John Humphrys. Dont know what he is talking about half the time-wish I did!

 

[Jemima Aslana]

Look - all I'm saying is that I admire good speech. I'm not saying everyone should talk the same way, or that regional accents are indicative of anything negative.

And yet you also say that you feel uncomfortable that Bush pronounces 'nuclear' the way he has heard it. Now, I don't know much about the American accents, but to me his speech never came across as anything but 'accented' (Hola! Imprecise use of the word accented - but I'm sure you know what I mean hehe) He sounds... well... Texan, strangely enough. Not as heavy a drawl as others I've heard but Texan all the same. So you don't frown on accents but you frown on Bush's accent, are you sure it's his accent you're frowning on and not something else?

It's interesting, you know, how languages and dialects develop. Go to Malaysia and listen to the English they speak there. Many have English as their mother-tongue in that country but I guarantee that you will find a horrible amount of flaws in it, because the pidgin that developed in Malaysia had the misfortune of being influenced by the local languages and dialects, causing weird sentence structures, word order and what-have-you. Yet this is not 'wrong' as such because it is in fact a completely acknowledged and accepted language there.

Ever noticed how many Asian people finish sentences with "Is it so?" where the rest of us would have said "Right?" It is obviously derived from some turn of phrase common amongst many Asian cultures (I think particularly South-East Asian - but I could be wrong).

So I think something as simple as a slightly different pronunciation is rather insignificant. Now if there in any way was a possibility of mistaking 'three men' for 'free men' in the context of the sentence I'd be highly critical of imprecise pronunciation, especially on higher levels of education, where it is expected that one can explain clearly and precisely, but if it's in reply to what that card is: 'Free of Spades' I really don't see a problem.

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

Look - all I'm saying is that I admire good speech.

And what would you propose as 'good speech'? Most probably someone speaking with a 'correct' NYC accent, no? But ask someone from another country, and their idea of 'good speech' would be someone who talks with /their/ accent. There is no way to define what 'good speech' is, as it varies from country to country. I know that here it is perfectly acceptable and considered 'good speech' if you pronounciate 'water' as wa-da, or as Kook already said 'four' as 'for-wa'. It would probably be considered by some to be contrary to 'good speech' if someone did otherwise.

 

[Libre]

Saying "nucular" rather than "nuclear" is not indicative that the speaker is a Texan, but rather that the speaker is a bird brain. Oh, well, as long as we understand what someone is saying, why should there be any standards? There is no such thing as prescriptive grammer, only descriptive grammer, is that it? Saying "I ain't got no" obviously means, "I haven't got any", so why should anybody grimmace when they hear the first phrase, and not the second?
To say there is no standard of correct language is hogwash. It is not a fixed, immutable, iron-clad, written in stone, RULE book to be sure. But yes, there are accepted forms and usages that are considered correct, and there are incorrect usages as well. To say that I would only apply my own standard, and that only New York English is acceptable to me, is quite insulting. I've conversed with people around the world. I've noticed that some are well spoken and others aren't. It has nothing to do with their accent.

Jamima Aslana, isn't it you that wrote:
"One of my fellow English students kept talking about the 'descenders' in Britain, and I really had no clue what he meant. Not until he had finished his point and our professor started to answer did it occur to me, through Professor Simonton's reply, that he was talking about the 'dissenters'.
There's a diff between a d and a t, you moron!"

I'm not the one calling anybody a moron. In fact, I started this thread to talk about imprecision, not mispronounciation. Certainly not regional variations, dialects, and accents. Now I'm being pegged as some sort of A) elitist, B) intolerant snob, or c) ethnocentric boob.

MonkeyCatcher, isn't it you that wrote:
"I /hate/ it when people say "free" instead of "three". Mispronouncing words is definately one of my pet hates (mispronounced by people who have English as their first language, of course...). I also hate it when people say "newst" instead of "used", or "I would of" instead of "I would have". Petty kind of person, huh? "

I think there is good usage of language and poor usage of language. Some people are well spoken and others are not. Where speech is concerned, I prefer the former. Let's let it go at that, and not have a nucular...I mean nuclear melt-down over it.

 

[The Prussian]

"Boughten" is one that really ruffles my feathers.

 

[Jemima Aslana]

Libre - so far I have yet to hear anyone claim that they had no idea that Bush was talking about nuclear weapons. That makes it imprecise pronunciation but not a semantically confusing mispronunciation. The one in my example was in fact semantically confusing because it became another existing word through the mispronunciation.

Also, I'll gladly admit to calling the man a moron, though I will also gladly admit that it was greatly coloured by the fact that I think he as a person is a moron (not to mention much harsher expletives) and through that realisation about myself I figured that it might be the same unforgiving attitude you held towards Bush. I meant no offense by it, but I keep hearing people complain that Bush *sounds* like a dunce. I have known quite a few people with speech impediments throughout my life and many of them have been eitehr normally intelligent or even above average - only *sounding* like they're a bit slow. So I'm generally very careful about judging people on their speech when I don't know them - hence my unwillingness to accept your harsh judgment of Bush's pronunciation of the word nuclear.

My classmate is a very intelligent man, who is by no means inept at English, I know for a fact that he is able to pronounce both d's and t's, and thus I think he has all the background he needs in order to say the word he intends to say. That I socially and as a human being dislike him to the point of utter revulsion is another thing, but I acknowledge the fact that he *is* in fact intelligent enough and have the skills to supposedly do it right - but he didn't - and he confused the meaning of what he said, hence my harsher judgment of him.

As for imprecision in language - I dare say it's imprecision when you inadvertently use the wrong word in a sentence.

But back to turns of phrases that irk me. I ran into one the other day in chat. This dude apparently feels he has a great friendship with me so when we said goodbye he called me 'sister'. And after he had logged off I was still staring at my screen thinking: "What the devil was that?" I know calling someone 'sister' or 'brother' is quite normal among certain groups of people, but this guy is not the stereotypical black person - he's not even black, nor am I. I suppose it's also partly because he obviously feels a lot closer to me than I do to him - I'm actually not too fond of him, but calling me 'sister'... where did *that* come from?

 

[novella]

In my world, calling someone 'sister' is kind of fresh, like calling someone 'kid.' Like "Hey kid, down in front!" It's not really a term of affection, more like a shove.

'Bro' is totally different, as is 'mama.'

I like vague words. I love reading dialogue that has all the idioms and vagueries of real speech. For teenagers it's a way of holding your own turf without being confrontational. Whatever.

As for GWB's language, you must realize that a lot of that is put on. The dude grew up in Connecticut and went to East Coast prep schools and Yale. His whole down home lazy-ass Texan thing is made up. Listen to his parents if you want to know how he really speaks, when no one is listening. I'm not saying he's secretly smart--au contraire--, but his fraudulence is multi-layered.

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

Saying "nucular" rather than "nuclear" is not indicative that the speaker is a Texan, but rather that the speaker is a bird brain.

A lot more than accent/pronounciation indicates that that particular person is a bird-brain

But yes, there are accepted forms and usages that are considered correct, and there are incorrect usages as well.

And I believe that these 'correct' and 'incorrect' usages would vary travelling from country to country, making it difficult to determine what "good language" really is.

To say that I would only apply my own standard, and that only New York English is acceptable to me, is quite insulting.

Please forgive me, I did not mean to insult you in any way.

MonkeyCatcher, isn't it you that wrote:
"I /hate/ it when people say "free" instead of "three". Mispronouncing words is definately one of my pet hates (mispronounced by people who have English as their first language, of course...). I also hate it when people say "newst" instead of "used", or "I would of" instead of "I would have". Petty kind of person, huh? "

I did say that, and I still mean it. You can see that I state that I am 'petty', and I stand by that comment too. I really can't stand it, and I cringe when I hear "free" instead of "three", even if it is used in their region. It's just the way that I have been raised and the fact that my dialect "rules" state that you should say "three". I never said it showed that they were somehow of a lesser intelligence, nor that they wern't using "good speech", just that it buggs me, which it does, as to my Kiwi ears they are mispronouncing words.

 

[Libre]

MonkeyCatcher - OK, no offense taken.
GW strikes me as a nincompoop, not because of his mispronounciation of the names of weapons, but because of his misuse of them. And because of his many gross miscalculations. And his unwillingness to admit his mistakes, or to revise his approach, or take any corrective action.

 

[leckert]

MonkeyCatcher - OK, no offense taken.
GW strikes me as a nincompoop, not because of his mispronounciation of the names of weapons, but because of his misuse of them. And because of his many gross miscalculations. And his unwillingness to admit his mistakes, or to revise his approach, or take any corrective action.

Whether I agree with you or not (which I don't) I am relieved to see that you have dubbed him a "bird-brain" based on something other than his accent, put on or not. (I think it probably is).

 

[abecedarian]

Whether I agree with you or not (which I don't) I am relieved to see that you have dubbed him a "bird-brain" based on something other than his accent, put on or not. (I think it probably is).

Yeah leckert, but do you say "dub-ya" or "dubble-yew" ???

ooops, this reminds me of my favorite dumb blonde joke..I'd better stop