RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to Community Chat

07:28, 29th March 2024 (GMT+0)

Pronunciation Question.

Posted by OceanLake
facemaker329
member, 6834 posts
Gaming for over 30
years, and counting!
Tue 9 Aug 2016
at 17:49
  • msg #14

Re: Pronunciation Question

The southern part of Sweden has such a strong dialect that there are even dictionaries available to translate it to 'regular' Swedish (and I don't mean a novelty book done as a joke about the dialect...the one I was shown was published by the came company that published translation dictionaries to other languages, a reputable academic publisher.)

And to further complicate the issue of regionalisms in language, people moving long distances used to be fairly rare, but it's now not uncommon (in my circles of social interaction, at least) that I will regularly be introduced to colloquialisms I've never heard before...and if the individual proves to he popular (or notorious) enough, others will start using it, and you may find yourself using 'regional' language quirks that aren't even from your region (when I started my job, a decade and a half ago, our director, production manager, ooerations manager, and one of our choreographers were all from the South--Tennessee and the Carolinas--and our entire department was sprinkled with Southern US dialect moments, despite being in Utah.)
StarMaster
member, 181 posts
Tue 9 Aug 2016
at 18:38
  • msg #15

Re: Pronunciation Question

Interesting discussion!

Y'all make some good points.

If you want to read an interesting book on the subject, try Bill Bryson's "The Mother Tongue (And How It Got That Way)".

He actually researched why our language (English) has gotten the way it has. I remember one example he mentions that,  in England, two villages on the opposite sides of the same hill (mountain), both spoke English, but neither could understand the other because the dialects were so different.

I can't remember if any other language has homonyms, but that's another problem with English.


As for idiolect and learnt, neither of them are flagged here when I type or on my own dictionary, so I suspect that there is no dictionary for RPoL but that it just enables your own spell-checker to edit as you type. So both words are already in my computer's dictionary.

I may be wrong, but I'd find it hard to believe that you could keep adding words to RPoL's dictionary... it'd become huge! And why wouldn't RPoL be in their dictionary? So I just added it to my dictionary, but it hasn't gone back and adjusted the RPoL that I typed here... and still flags it. Hmmm. Confusing...
bigbadron
moderator, 15145 posts
He's big, he's bad,
but mostly he's Ron.
Tue 9 Aug 2016
at 19:11

Re: Pronunciation Question

Tyr Hawk:
a word which spellcheck on this site doesn't think exists

There is no spellcheck on this site.  Any spellchecking you're seeing is coming from your own system (probably built in to your browser).
LadyMer
member, 75 posts
Tue 9 Aug 2016
at 20:54
  • msg #17

Re: Pronunciation Question

StarMaster:
I can't remember if any other language has homonyms, but that's another problem with English.


Many other languages have homonyms. French, for example: Cette/sept, Vers/vets/verre, La mère du maire est tombée dans la mer. Linguistics is fun!
icosahedron152
member, 594 posts
Tue 9 Aug 2016
at 21:27
  • msg #18

Re: Pronunciation Question

willvr:
To be fair, you can set that to override. I have it set to Australian English on my computer; which is usually leaning towards British; except for Aussie slang which is as weird as anything.


Actually, you can't.
That's the point I was making.

You can set your spellchecker to British English, but that still gives you British English as programmed by an American - and it's far from guaranteed to be correct. I suspect the same will be true for the Aussie English setting.

My computer is set to British English, but it still underlines correct words and fails to underline errors.

Anyone uncertain of their schooling who follows their spellchecker because 'the computer must be right' is going to have errors compounded into their documents.

The only way you can override it is to turn the thing off altogether (if you are still allowed to do that?) And how many have the confidence to do that, anyway?

I keep mine on partly because I can't be bothered to interrogate the thing deeply enough to find the off switch (which will probably switch itself back on again first chance it gets), and partly because I know my writing is not perfect and it might occasionally catch a genuine error - at which point, if I'm not certain that I know better than the machine, and if it hasn't cried wolf so often today that I'm past caring, I'll consult a dictionary - one written before ZX 1981, because even our dictionaries are compiled with spellcheckers these days, and consequently you can't trust those, either...

That may be bordering on paranoia, but I have definitely seen scholarly texts with 'spellchecker errors' in them, and a dictionary is just another scholarly text. Maybe dictionaries are holding out thanks to robust checking by individuals who still remember how to spell, and I can't say I've ever found a spelling mistake in a dictionary, but I suspect it's just a matter of time. One day all our dictionaries will be vetted by people who were taught British English by Mr Gates - if they're still vetted by people at all - if paper dictionaries still exist. :(

Don't make anything like they used to. What do they teach youngsters these days... Mutter, mumble...
Tyr Hawk
member, 205 posts
You know that one guy?
Yeah, that's me.
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 00:18
  • msg #19

Re: Pronunciation Question

bigbadron:
Tyr Hawk:
a word which spellcheck on this site doesn't think exists

There is no spellcheck on this site.  Any spellchecking you're seeing is coming from your own system (probably built in to your browser).

My bad then. For whatever reason it only comes up as an error on this site, but that's probably because the other sites I'm on either override the browser-based checker or I'm not noticing it. Thanks for the clarification. ^_^

icosahedron152:
I can't say I've ever found a spelling mistake in a dictionary, but I suspect it's just a matter of time. One day all our dictionaries will be vetted by people who were taught British English by Mr Gates - if they're still vetted by people at all - if paper dictionaries still exist. :(

It's funny you should say all of this, really, since there's at least one word out there invented by a dictionary misspelling, and then there are the opinions and truths of at least one person who actually does edit dictionaries which would, if I'm reading your mutterings right, make your head spin. ;)
icosahedron152
member, 596 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 06:38
  • msg #20

Re: Pronunciation Question

Tyr Hawk:
It's funny you should say all of this, really, since there's at least one word out there invented by a dictionary misspelling, and then there are the opinions and truths of at least one person who actually does edit dictionaries which would, if I'm reading your mutterings right, make your head spin. ;)


Hmm. Interesting reading, but whereas I can understand and accept the word ‘cat’ coming to mean a catalytic converter as well as a feline mammal (just as it once had a different meaning aboard ship), his list of accepted and emergent forms to my mind simply demonstrates the deplorable state of learning in today’s schools.

(However, there are a couple of errors there that I make myself - thanks for the tuition, told you I wasn’t perfect. I’m not the sort of social bore who will go around currying Flavel at every opportunity as an excuse to demonstrate my ‘superior knowledge’, but I shall be careful to spell minuscule correctly in future - and apparently that is one of the few that scores a point for my spellchecker. Well done Billy, you got me with that one).

Neither am I convinced that the dictionary compilers can necessarily tell where a change has come from. The internet is so pervasive these days that changes cannot remain traceable forever.

When 95% of the British population spells ‘colour’ without a U, because they were taught the correct spelling once when they were seven, and they’ve seen it written the American way every day of their lives since, what are the dictionary compilers going to do then? The guy has already told you what they’ll do - the ‘new’ spelling will be listed first as an alternative for a few decades, then as a preference.

Global climate goes through natural changes, but man-made Global Warming is an environmental hazard to be resisted. Likewise natural linguistic variations are acceptable, but ‘spellcheckerism’ is an artificial error-inducer to be avoided, IMO.

Sorry, but I’m pulling up the drawbridge on my ivory tower...

As a matter of interest, do other languages suffer from these spellchecker errors, or is it just the Brits and the Aussies whose language is being artificially altered by American computers?
StarMaster
member, 185 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 08:05
  • msg #21

Re: Pronunciation Question

You may be right about the world's youth and the Internet.

Not having been a youth for 500 moons or so, it's hard for me to judge. I've known about the British spelling of 'colour' for most of that time, and would spell my words that way if I was writing for a British audience. Same for 'realise' instead of 'realize'. Or the use of 'got' in lieu of 'gotten' (despite the English still say 'ill-gotten gains'.

And you have to be careful what you complain about. There are American words that the English complain about getting added into the British-English language without realizing that we took the word and the spelling from them originally.

Also, some of our words and spellings are the result of an arbitrary decision by the dictionary compiler. In some cases, there may have been four different ways to spell a word, and he just chose the one that he thought looked 'right'... or preferred, regardless of all other factors.

The reason dictionaries keep getting update is because they've evolved from being how we are supposed to talk/write to how we really talk/write. That's why 'words' like 'lol' are now in the dictionary.
icosahedron152
member, 598 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 17:33
  • msg #22

Re: Pronunciation Question

You've made my point very well, StarMaster. 'Realise' is one of Billy's insidious fabrications. We don't spell it with an S over here.

Well, we do now...

English spelling is hard enough to master at the best of times, without your teacher telling you one thing and your computer telling you another.

I agree with you that there are some words that have remained the same in America, but have 'acceptably changed' in Britain, so that strictly, the American version is 'correct', but I can't tell you exactly which ones they are.

Nevertheless, those are 'natural' changes, I'm not grumbling about those, I'm just grumbling about the wholesale mangling of an entire generation's understanding of spelling and grammar because one of their primary educational resources has been programmed incorrectly - and all because Billy Gates didn't employ a British professor of English to help him with his homework, he figured he could do it 'in-house'.

It's a bug. It's been replicating itself in the software of every computer on the planet for over thirty years, it's undermined British schooling, and it's never been fixed because it doesn't affect the majority of users; it only affects those who use the British English (and probably the Australian English) settings.

Within another thirty years, there won't be anyone alive who knows how to fix the bug. Will it matter? Probably not. The American version of British English will become standard teaching and everyone will do it the same way.

It's just darned annoying to my generation, who are struggling against the tide.
engine
member, 162 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 17:47
  • msg #23

Re: Pronunciation Question

icosahedron152:
It's just darned annoying to my generation, who are struggling against the tide.
Why struggle?
bigbadron
moderator, 15146 posts
He's big, he's bad,
but mostly he's Ron.
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:03

Re: Pronunciation Question

Pretty certain I've been spelling it "realise" for about the last fifty years.  Since well before Microsoft existed.
swordchucks
member, 1245 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:19
  • msg #25

Re: Pronunciation Question

The only linguistic hill I'm ready to die on is "irregardless".  It's a nonsense word, and I generally lower my opinion of anyone I see or hear using it.
engine
member, 163 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:24
  • msg #26

Re: Pronunciation Question

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 25):

Does the lowering of your opinion of that person tend to get borne out over time?
swordchucks
member, 1247 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:34
  • msg #27

Re: Pronunciation Question

Do you mean "is the person that used the bad word also dumb"?  Not always.  Sometimes, it's a perfectly intelligent person that still uses the word.  I tend to remember that they use it and view their other faults in a more stark light (and we all have faults - especially me - so that's not quite fair).

It's actually worse when it comes from an otherwise well-spoken person.
icosahedron152
member, 599 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:37
  • msg #28

Re: Pronunciation Question

Check your (pre-1981) paper dictionary, Ron. Realist, realism, but realize and realization are correct forms (who said English was logical?)

You've probably been spelling it with an S for over thirty of those fifty years, because that's how long the problem has been festering away, undermining everyone's confidence that they're right and every computer on the planet is wrong.


Why struggle, engine?

I'll choose to assume you're American...

Imagine that spellcheckers are a British invention, and they keep adding an extraneous U every time you write color, or favor, or honor, or...

The only way you can stop the darned machine from wrecking your spelling and making you look a prune in front of any educated correspondent, is to switch off the autocorrect and deprive yourself of its facility.

And then the darned machine starts corrupting your children's spelling and grammar against your best efforts to teach them.

I struggle against incorrect English for the same reason I'd struggle against incorrect Geography or incorrect History.

Suppose Google Maps incorrectly places Hawaii in the Atlantic Ocean, suppose Wikipedia mixes up the names of the Founding Fathers with the names of the cast of Frasier. Are you going to struggle and complain about it, or just accept it as the 'new reality'?
RosstoFalstaff
member, 40 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 18:41
  • msg #29

Re: Pronunciation Question

In reply to icosahedron152 (msg # 28):

The difference being that spelling is correct depending on country.

Geography and History (though by no means a hard science) at least carry cross-border acceptance.

Change the language of your spellchecker. If your children are influenced by their spellchecker, then one language is replacing the other. Meme theory at it's finest, genetics applied to language and ideas.
icosahedron152
member, 600 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 19:10
  • msg #30

Re: Pronunciation Question

In reply to RosstoFalstaff (msg # 29):

No, spelling and grammar has objective reality.

Names of Prime Ministers vary from country to country, but names of the Prime Ministers of a particular country are internationally accepted.

In the same way, spellings vary from country to country, but the way British people spell, or the way French people spell, have internationally accepted form.

Unless, of course, someone with a dangerous amount of influence makes a mistake and refuses to face up to it and put it right.

And, for the umpteenth time, it's not about changing the language on the spellchecker. The British English language setting has been programmed incorrectly, and nobody outside of the UK knows or cares. Even half of of our own people neither know nor care now.

How about if we replace your language with Chinese, cos Chinese are in the majority. Still happy with Meme Theory?
engine
member, 164 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 19:25
  • msg #31

Re: Pronunciation Question

swordchucks:
It's actually worse when it comes from an otherwise well-spoken person.
Why is that?

icosahedron152:
Imagine that spellcheckers are a British invention, and they keep adding an extraneous U every time you write color, or favor, or honor, or...

The only way you can stop the darned machine from wrecking your spelling and making you look a prune in front of any educated correspondent, is to switch off the autocorrect and deprive yourself of its facility.
Or, I can just not worry about it, since the actual statements I'm making should make it abundantly clear that I'm not a "prune," and anyone who chooses to assume I am one based only on non-standard spelling is far more of one than I.

icosahedron152:
And then the darned machine starts corrupting your children's spelling and grammar against your best efforts to teach them.
"Corrupting"?

icosahedron152:
I struggle against incorrect English for the same reason I'd struggle against incorrect Geography or incorrect History.

Suppose Google Maps incorrectly places Hawaii in the Atlantic Ocean, suppose Wikipedia mixes up the names of the Founding Fathers with the names of the cast of Frasier. Are you going to struggle and complain about it, or just accept it as the 'new reality'?
Are you quoting someone as saying "new reality"?

History and geography are generally fact based. I can prove the truth of those two example facts to any degree necessary, but if I didn't there would be real consequences for the people who tried to operate using them: they would be unable to find Hawaii, and they would have tremendous difficulty discussing American history coherently. They would then probably cease using or recommending Wikipedia as a resource and Wikipedia would suffer.

(If you had meant "geography" and "history" in the sense of disputed borders or disputed claims, those might be worth struggling over and correcting people on, despite lack of definite, agreed-upon proof, but that's apparently not what you meant.)

But language and grammar are not very fact-based and in fact are deeply arbitrary and change at a rapid rate, regardless of (and probably partly due to) efforts to solidify them. There's often no right answer, and even when there is that right answer might very well get overused and result in hypercorrection.

There are "internationally accepted" forms, sure, but the very fact that most people don't know or care should tell us that it's not as big a problem as getting real facts wrong. Understanding is apparently not impacted.

There are consequences for incorrect spelling and grammar, but most of them are not "real," in the sense that the person will see an independent result of their error. The consequences are of people lowering their opinion of that person, even when they perfectly understood what the person meant. If someone uses "its" instead of "it's" and I understood them and I don't worry about it, then there's no problem, certainly not on the scale of not being able to find Hawaii when they need to.

I practice good spelling and grammar and I try to pass that on to my kids, but I can't see much point in "struggling" any further than that. But carry on by, all means. I just wanted to answer your question, as I hoped you'd answer mine.

Edit: I will say that I'm glad to be informed of this fact regarding spell check. I'm not worried about it, but I find it funny and interesting.
This message was last edited by the user at 19:27, Wed 10 Aug 2016.
bigbadron
moderator, 15147 posts
He's big, he's bad,
but mostly he's Ron.
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 19:43

Re: Pronunciation Question

Old dictionaries might well have spelt it "realize".  That does not alter the fact that I spelt it "realise".  I wasn't able to find an old dictionary to check their spelling (too many house moves in the intervening years), but I do still have some postcards that I sent to my mother in 1973, while on a school organised holiday.  One of them contains the word "realise"

So that would predate the founding of Microsoft in 1975.  Once again, it seems, Bill Gates is getting the credit for somebody else's innovation.  Ten thousand curses upon him, and his speelchocker!
icosahedron152
member, 602 posts
Wed 10 Aug 2016
at 20:18
  • msg #33

Re: Pronunciation Question

In reply to engine (msg # 31):

Corrupting, in the sense of corrupt data - incorrect, nonsense, meaningless gibberish, resulting in wasted time and increased effort to get the desired result.

No, I'm not making a direct quote, merely putting into words an apparent inference, more completely: 'don't bother struggling against it, this is the new reality, get used to it'.

You try to pass on good spelling and grammar to your kids, but you don't have their spellcheckers undermining your efforts, do you? your spellchecker reinforces your teaching.
Imagine the frustration when almost everything they read is contradicting your teaching.

We evidently have a completely different opinion of the importance of this issue and consequently there is little point in discussing it further. Frankly, changing your mind about it isn't worth my effort. If I were in discussion with the editor-in-chief at Microsoft I'd be more interested in pressing my point.

I've raised my point, and explained it, I'm going to spend some time gaming now.
Tyr Hawk
member, 206 posts
You know that one guy?
Yeah, that's me.
Thu 11 Aug 2016
at 04:22
  • msg #34

Re: Pronunciation Question

icosahedron152:
No, spelling and grammar has objective reality.

They do not, actually, at least not when we're speaking about true objectivity. Yes, names do have objective reality, but only proper nouns are truly objective, and even then only in the original language and with the original alphabet. It's not the same as geography (where Hawaii is relative to Alaska does not change because people decide it's that way now), as history (though the spin on history is subjective), or as mathematics (2+2=5 for certain values of 2, but those certain values will always add up that way). It's nowhere close, honestly. One can spell fish as "ghoti" if one wants to, and the only reason most people don't on a regular basis is because most people don't know about the spelling or agree with it.

Now, there are objective realities within certain spheres, like Academia, or within a particular region where you could claim such things, but the only "objective" thing about these realities is that someone (usually someone with authority) decided that it was the "right way" and no one has changed that quite yet. Grammar rules, spelling, and even pronunciation for what's "correct" in a language have historically been decided upon by the elite few and the uneducated masses have had to live with whatever the officials say. Some of those official rules also change as the language evolves, and so the only "sacred" ones are the ones people stubbornly cling to at the moment trying to resist that natural change, one which very well may be better for everyone anyways.

In other words: Bill Gates is only one in a long line of folks doing this (injecting viruses, as you put it), and most of the precious rules and spellings in every version of English were decided upon by people just like him; they just had the benefit of doing it earlier in history and so not coming under your scrutiny, apparently.

If you're not upset about "natural changes" then you have to accept that there is no right or wrong in any language, only "right now," "right here," and "that doesn't sound right to me." It doesn't matter where the change originates (rich folks with spellcheckers, exchange students with their "broken" English, or some pop star with an attitude problem) if it becomes accepted then that's language evolution and it's all natural. Miniscule vs Minuscule was the perfect example of that. The change can start wherever, whenever, and by whomever. Just because the technology is different now doesn't mean it's any different than newspapers or Bibles with typos, both of which have "naturally" created sustained words and spellings we now accept. Tech is tech, words are words, and Bill Gates is not ruining anyone's language any more than your teachers ruined your natural dialect by instructing you on the Academic Form. It's all a process, an evolving thing that no one can stop for long, and anyone claiming to be okay with "natural changes" shouldn't be arguing against.

But people will argue because people really just dislike change, and some dislike it in some places/situations, and others dislike it in others, and that's okay; it's natural to want stability. But at some point you have to measure gain vs loss and decide if whether it being an 's' or a 'z' really matters. Whether pronouncing it "zee" or "zed" should come between people and separate them, spark arguments and hatred towards folks for not doing it your way. Whether it's worth your time and effort to fight a change happening on a larger scale which will only really hurt your pride if it comes to fruition. And, if some other change doesn't, if you manage to keep that alteration at bay, then what is the victory and who is it for? I'm all for fighting the good fight, and making the world better, but as both an English Teacher and a proud American, I wish we used the metric system and kind of like the doubled consonants for things like travelling. We don't though, and I've never just never let the underline bother me.

But, if you want to complain, I'm certain you can find kindred spirits amongst the millions whose native tongues were actually destroyed by European conquerors and settlers insisting their language was right (not politics, I swear, just history). You could also probably email Gates and company, download another spellchecker, or realize that, even though you seem to think...
icosahedron:
your spellchecker reinforces your teaching.

even the American spellchecker (the Gates one, to be clear) doesn't actually catch everything, including a handful of common terms and almost half the grammatical errors folks make daily (errors according to standard American Academic English, that is). No system is perfect, and if you still don't like the other options, your best bet is to build a rival company with like-minded folks and do it yourself.

"Change is the only constant in life" and language, I would add. ^_^
icosahedron152
member, 606 posts
Thu 11 Aug 2016
at 06:36
  • msg #35

Re: Pronunciation Question

Tyr Hawk:
even the American spellchecker (the Gates one, to be clear) doesn't actually catch everything, including a handful of common terms and almost half the grammatical errors folks make daily (errors according to standard American Academic English, that is). No system is perfect, and if you still don't like the other options, your best bet is to build a rival company with like-minded folks and do it yourself.

"Change is the only constant in life" and language, I would add. ^_^


You have my sympathies regarding your own spellcheckerisms. You should have some notion of where I'm coming from, then.

Create a company that could oust Microsoft? If only!

The difference here is one of scale. In the past, subtle changes have taken place over time, an odd word here, an odd phrase there, and people have got(ten) used to each idea and made a choice about whether to take up the new idea or not.

The spellcheckers, on the other hand, have suddenly and overwhelmingly ridden roughshod over our accepted norms.

The only past equivalent is the foreign invasions you mentioned - and yes, it feels as if our natural (and naturally evolving) language has been suddenly invaded by something foreign and 'wrong', and like any foreign invasion, the desire to resist is strong. The only people who have accepted these imposed changes are the ones who don't know any better - the most vulnerable, usually our children.

The invasion of our language will ultimately succeed (unless the spellcheckers admit and fix their errors, which after thirty years isn't going to happen), but that doesn't mean that we have to like it, or stop complaining about it and just accept it.

I wasn't saying that this has injected a virus into our language (though it has) I was stating that it is literally a programming 'bug'. I doubt if Bill Gates and his employees deliberately set out to pervert British English - the programmers made a mistake, a bug, by choosing the wrong advisers when they built their spellcheckers, and that bug has never been fixed.
pitademon
member, 810 posts
hi all
Fri 12 Aug 2016
at 04:01
  • msg #36

Re: Pronunciation Question

Back to the s or z sound. I remember taking a college English course where in one class we walked about such.  A few things to take into consideration is ethnicity of the speaker and regional dialects.  Those of African descent (please remember this was over 30 years ago so things may have changed) often had trouble with long? 'k' sounds (as in the word 'ask' - the 'keh' sound), it was replaced with a moe 'x' sound.  Making 'ask' to become 'axe'.
Regional dialects might be as common as the Midwest 'r sound popping up in words such as 'wash'.  In Arkansas or Iowa if might become 'warsh'.  In Boston It might become 'wahsh' (with a short a sound).
Tyr Hawk
member, 207 posts
You know that one guy?
Yeah, that's me.
Fri 12 Aug 2016
at 15:34
  • msg #37

Re: Pronunciation Question

icosahedron152:
You have my sympathies regarding your own spellcheckerisms. You should have some notion of where I'm coming from, then.

I do, but I've learned that spellcheckers aren't the end-all, be-all. They don't help when they're wrong, but that's why you just teach people to not rely on them. Once folks know the spellchecker isn't perfect, they're more likely to not trust it when it conflicts with something they've been taught. Well, at least that's been my experience. Anecdotal evidence, I know, but I work with what I've got since I haven't seen any studies published to this effect.

icosahedron152:
Create a company that could oust Microsoft? If only!

I was talking more about a spellchecker company that could build a plug-in for Microsoft Word or whathave you, but sure. That works too. ;)

icosahedron152:
The difference here is one of scale. In the past, subtle changes have taken place over time, an odd word here, an odd phrase there, and people have got(ten) used to each idea and made a choice about whether to take up the new idea or not.

All changes to language are faster and more broad-sweeping than they have been in the past. As technology advances, everything moves faster and faster, communication of typos, new terms, new grammatical structures, it's all very fast compared to what it was. You can't blame the spellchecker for being as fast as the technology allows any more than the newspaper misprints of minuscule. That was the speed of technology, and it's always moving just a bit quicker than it was a few decades ago.

When a celebrity says something, the entire connected world can learn about it and adopt that linguistic flux within seconds now. When an episode of your favorite show coins a new phrase or even a nonsense word, millions are exposed to it and can adopt it at once. Not everyone does though, just like not everyone accepts spellcheck as Word of God. Ultimately, in an era where linguistic changes from any source can be as effective as a conquering of an entire nation, spellcheck is not the Empire riding roughshod over a village. It's just one soldier on the linguistic front - perhaps as much as a small squadron - but certainly nothing in comparison to the everyday interactions people have in which they completely ignore the rules of spelling and grammar as Academics know them (y u h8n on mah grammer son?).

You give Gates and his spellchecker too much credit, I think. It's just a sign of the times being what they are, not the other way around.

icosahedron152:
I wasn't saying that this has injected a virus into our language (though it has) I was stating that it is literally a programming 'bug'. I doubt if Bill Gates and his employees deliberately set out to pervert British English - the programmers made a mistake, a bug, by choosing the wrong advisers when they built their spellcheckers, and that bug has never been fixed.

That was my bad on the interpretation of the word "bug." Man. English sure is a funny language, isn't it? ;)


And yes, pita, that's exactly what we've been talking about (well, some of us more than others). Pronunciation is a wonderfully complex thing, though it has less to do with race and more to do with where and how you're raised. Last I checked, babies aren't confined to any particular group of sounds (unless there's a speech impediment) and so as they grow, they simply lose and/or never fully acquire the phonemes and monemes they would need in order to pronounce a word a certain way. That's why dialects and accents exist. African Americans don't have any physical limit to the sound they can make (that I know of), it's just that they were raised in an environment where that 'keh' sound isn't prevalent when combined with the 'ss' sound. Thus 'axe' for 'ask' but still 'keh-tull' for 'kettle.' ^_^

It might not be the most-common variant, but it's still a valid one.
icosahedron152
member, 608 posts
Fri 12 Aug 2016
at 18:41
  • msg #38

Re: Pronunciation Question

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, change is accelerating on every front, but I maintain that British English is probably changing faster than most languages, thanks to that confounded programming bug in Billy's spellchecker.
Sign In