ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (11/17/85)
> = Tim (radzy) Radzykewycz >> = Me >>>How about "nuclear" pronounced "noo-que-lur", as if spelled "noocuulur"? >>> - David Schachter > >> Phonetically, this is a simple swapping of two adjacent consonants: >> nuclear /nuwkl0y0r/ vs nucular? /nuwky0l0r/ > >This isn't the case. The "correct" pronunciation of "nuclear" not >/nuwklOyOr/, which has the only accent on the first syllable, but >instead it is /nuwkliyOr/, with the accent on the second syllable >(the one in question) and the [liy] sounds clearly enunciated. We clearly disagree (no blame!). I have never in my life heard `nuclear' pronounced: `nuclEar' /n0klIy0r/ ie: nuh KLEE er ^ ^ accent here ..or even: V V `new clEE-er' /nuwklIyor/ ..which is how most american speakers would say it, were the accent on the vowel following `cl'. I have a problem with /nuwkliy0r/, which I'd pronounce as "new clee-r" (a person who just started to clee, whatever that means), since it implies a doubly accented word (to me), and `nuclear' is not a doubly-accented word, like `cAmptOWn', `elEctrIcity', or `gAslIght', to this ear, anyway.. >The switch from /nuwkliyOr/ to /nuwkyOlOr/ is several-fold: > 1. change major accent from second to first syllable I have never in my life heard `nuclear' accented on other than the first syllable. My dictionary (American College) agrees: - u -- [-, -- = `long', u = `short'] nuclear (nu'kli0r, noo'-) [0 = schwa, ' = accent previous vowel] > 2. change 'iy' sound to 'O' (schwa -- "stongly" unaccented vowel) We have probably misunderstood each other here. When I use /0/, I mean a strictly UNACCENTED sound of indeterminate quality, as in: `the fellow' /dh0 fel0w/ `the apple' /dh0y aep0l/ `curriculum' /k0riky0l0m/ `enunciation' /0naans0yeysh0n/ {/aa/=u in `but') The /0/ is certainly colored by the environment, especially following glides {y,w,r,l} and nasals {m,n,ng}. I agree that /iy/ and /0y/ in /iyz0y/ `easy' are similar sounds. English, as all Teutonic languages, tends to turn all unaccented vowels to schwas whose precise value is fully determined by the following consonant -- (y,w,r,l,m,n are notable in this respect). In this sense, I have never heard such a thing as an unccented english vowel that is not a schwa. Words like `tapdance' /taepdaens/, `february' /febr0wer1/, and `antidisestablishmentarianism' /aentaydis0staebl0shm0nter0y0nis0m/ of course, are multiply accented, precisely where non-schwa's appear. Native anglo-saxon wordstock is usually much better behaved than the multisyllabate Latinate monstrosities. > 3. metathesis in [lOyO] to [yOlO] > >I think that the reasons this particular example bothers people are: > 1. It is (supposedly) only pronounced /nuwkyOlOr/ by uneducated > people, and these are a large group of the people who form > the "anti-nukes" groups. (Before sending flames, please read on. > I'll get back to this.) Having read on, I still think that uneducated people tend to be more pro-nuke than anti-nuke. Without hard statistics we are BOTH probably blowing hot air, however. I'll bet we hold opposing viewpoints on this issue, if that is important, and I do not think it is nearly as important as being friends, though I could be mistaken. > 2. The accent change is "radical". >The more dramatic *linguistic* change is the second, however Again, I challenge you or anyone else to document the pronunciation of `nuclear' with accent on `cle' rather than on `nu'. You may be correct, of course. It's just that I've NEVER in my life heard `nuclear' accented anywhere but on the first syllable, and my dictionaries agree, although they may be incorrect -- especially since I have no Webster's, and my OED is likely to be unconvincing for such a modern word, >the more dramatic *cultural* objection is the first. It >seems to me that the major objection to mis-pronounced words >won't be uncovered by any amount of linguistic study, but >rather by cultural study of language (e.g.sociolinguistics). > >Item 1 seems to mean that the people who don't know anything >about nuclear engineering and nuclear technology are trying >to make the decisions about policy -- a no-good way of doing >business. > >It may or may not be the case that the decision-makers are >influenced more by the anti-nuke protests than by engineering >types. It also may be that the people who pronounce nuclear >as /nuwkyOlOr/ are not un-educated, but these facts do not >have anything to do with the argument I'm trying to make about >linguistics. Some of my dearest friends are either poorly educated or pro-nuke or both; these same friends also frequently say /nuwky0l0r/, although I see no reason to fault them on any divergence from my own attitudes. -michael `nuke the anglos' ellis