donn (09/03/82)
Re: unc.3906 (David Elliot) 'Spurious Questions' This sounds like (excuse the pun) a dialect difference. I once got into an argument with a linguistics professor over his pronunciation of the word 'sure'. Using 'S' to represent the 'sh' sound, my pronunciation is [Srr] whereas his pronunciation was [Syuur]. I claimed that he was 'hyper- correcting', but after some time it was apparent that he really did always pronounce it with an [u]. If it were a true case of hypercorrection then I suspect that the [Syuur] pronunciation would alternate with [Srr] in his speech with some measurable frequency, much as the [r]s in some New Yawkuh dialects fade in and out. But he was consistent, and I'll wager that [spyuuri@s] speakers are consistent too, although I myself always say [sprri@s]. It's clear from spelling that historically some instances of [u] before [r] have reduced to a vocalic [r]: for example 'fur' [frr], 'spur' [sprr], etc. I think the 'spurious' pronunciation differences are due to an exten- sion of this reduction process to other environments in English. (In the case of 'spurious', this may even have occurred by analogy with 'spur'.) Original 'long' vowels (as in 'cure') may be more immune to the reduction than short vowels (as in 'cur'). (But I say [kyrr] and [krr], respec- tively.) Thinking about it, it seems to me that in fact only diphthongal 'u's (namely those pronounced [yuu] when not preceding [r]) fall victim to the reduction in my dialect. I never say [trr] for 'tour', for example. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Donn Seeley UCSD Chemistry Dept. RRCF ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdchema!donn