View previous topic | View next topic

Dissected

Page 2 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

suze
519151.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:34 pm Reply with quote

grabagrannie wrote:
I did not understand the figures attached to 'accept'/'except', but I take it that a significant number of people pronounce these two words the same.


I had to read that bit a couple of times as well. What it's saying there is that 21% of people are inconsistent on their pronunciation of the two words; they don't always pronounce them the same and don't always pronounce them differently.

Of those who are consistent, 13% pronounce the two words the same.


Next time such an exercise is undertaken, I'd like to see "integral" on the list. I've never heard it stressed on the second syllable when speaking of calculus, but a significant proportion of people seem to do so otherwise.

 
Jenny
519245.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:32 pm Reply with quote

I've just been sitting here probably looking faintly lunatic, saying 'except' and 'accept' out loud, and they don't sound the same to me, though they are certainly very similar. I can feel in my mouth the difference in the 'e' and 'a' sounds too.

 
Moosh
519254.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:41 pm Reply with quote

If I deliberately say 'except' and 'accept' out loud then they're very different. But in conversation I may pronounce accept 'ahgzept', which is closer, but still a different sound.

 
suze
519283.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:12 pm Reply with quote

Don't worry Jenny, I've done that sort of thing far too many times!

But your experience there proves that you are of the majority for whom the two words are different.

 
Quizmike
519297.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:37 pm Reply with quote

Surely language is there in order to communicate. So as long as the person hearing the word understands its meaning then it is a correct pronounciation.

Otherwise we'd all be speaking Chaucerian.

 
bobwilson
519311.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:46 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
Next time such an exercise is undertaken, I'd like to see "integral" on the list. I've never heard it stressed on the second syllable when speaking of calculus, but a significant proportion of people seem to do so otherwise.


I pronounce integral with the stress on the first syllable when using it as a noun (ie calculus) but with the stress on the second syllable when used as an adjective.

 
suze
519347.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:02 pm Reply with quote

Thinking about it, I think it's only ever stressed on the second syllable when used as an adjective - no one discussing calculus would talk about "an inTEGral".

I don't think anyone would speak of "the inTEGral calculus" either, although it's an adjective there.

But for sure, you're by no means alone if you'd say something like "this is an inTEGral part of that", although personally I don't. Also given in some of the dictionaries is "in-TEEG-ral", which I have certainly heard, but possibly not this side of the Atlantic.

 
Moosh
519356.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:11 pm Reply with quote

Similarly to Bob, I would certainly stress the second syllable when saying "an integral part of", but would stress the first syllable when talking about calculus. But I wouldn't be surprised if I heard someone say IN-tegral when using it as an adjective.

 
bobwilson
519363.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:18 pm Reply with quote

According to my Penguin dictionary (actually, it's quite good) - the adjectival form can be stressed on either the first or second syllable, but the noun form MUST be stressed on the first.

 
suze
519364.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:20 pm Reply with quote

Yea, that sounds fair to me, and the first dictionary I grabbed off the shelf (Concise Oxford) says the same.

 
grabagrannie
519402.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:01 pm Reply with quote

Hello, Droid. How inconsistent you are! I've never heard of a dissector microscope, but I can guess what it must be (a microscope which is used to view dissections of very small things?). You must be in the 'business' of dissecting things. Do you have many colleagues? Perhaps you could do a mini-survey of 'professionals' to see how they pronounce the word. But ask them to spell it first, and see how many get it right. I do not expect any better result than the 2007 survey, since I have heard many biologists and botanists on the radio pronounce it as 'die-sect'. I should not have been amazed at the result of the survey, since I must admit I have very rarely heard anybody on TV or radio pronounce the word as 'dis-sect'. I also have to admit, again, that I am in the minority, and the survey would indicate that the 'correct' pronunciation is now 'die-sect'. The only thing in my favour is that my dictionaries say it should be 'dis-sect'. But they are over 10 years old. Does anybody have a more up-to-date one that admits 'die-sect' as a possible pronunciation?
Have you noticed that we are losing 'There are' in spoken English? Almost everybody I hear on radio or TV says ' There's ' whether followed by a singular or a plural. Are there any linguists out there who can tell us whether this is what happened in French, Spanish and German which have only one form for 'there is' or 'there are' [il y a, hay, es gibt].
And it's the same with 'lay' and 'lie'. Nobody seems to use the verb 'to lie' any more.
Quizmike makes a point that is often made in this sort of discussion. There is no point in my trying to halt the changes in the English language. It's just so sad to see the language deteriorate (in my opinion). I mean, what's the point of learning all that stuff we learnt at school if nobody is going to take any notice? Surely, though (changing my thread from pronunciation to spelling, punctuation and grammar) most of us would object if books and newspapers came full of suprises* and seperate* supliments*? You wouldn't except* that, would you? [The email from Nottingham University I mentioned above did not come from anybody in the English Department. It was from someone dealing with accommodation.]

 
samivel
519525.  Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:27 pm Reply with quote

grabagrannie wrote:
I mean, what's the point of learning all that stuff we learnt at school if nobody is going to take any notice?


That's hardly restricted to matters of pronunciation, though. I don't suppose more than 20% of what is taught at school is ever of any use later on.

 
Droid
519629.  Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:00 am Reply with quote

My 1974 Collins English Gem dictionary goes with Diss. That's good enough for me! I'm changing my pronunciation from now on, although I'll probably forget later.
Dissector microscopes are the ones you carry out dissections with. They have an open stage for working in, but they are often called stereo-microscopes. We use the term dissector to separate them from other stereo-microscopes that do not have the open working stage.
Integral is a part of integer in this dictionary and it puts the stress on the first syllable for both the word on it's own and with calculus.

 
bobwilson
520067.  Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:26 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
Dissector microscopes are the ones you carry out dissections with. They have an open stage for working in, but they are often called stereo-microscopes. We use the term dissector to separate them from other stereo-microscopes that do not have the open working stage.


A microscope you carry out disections with? The Swiss Army knife of microscopes?

 
Quizmike
520073.  Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:01 pm Reply with quote

grabagrannie wrote:
I mean, what's the point of learning all that stuff we learnt at school if nobody is going to take any notice?


True. Hell all those hours spent on the current state of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact countries. Oh well at least it will be useful if I ever holiday in Leningrad.

Anyway the one thing I really detest at the moment is "loosing" and "loose" for losing and lose. When the heck did this start?

 

Page 2 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group