Re: Stephen Donaldson

MikeQ wrote:

Dang. First attempt got deleted. Stupid google groups.

No. I don't believe for a second that it is pronounced the same way in
those languages, especially since you didn't say "bylaw" itself was a
word in any of those languages.

Back to pronunciation again. There are just too many variations in
pronunciation for that to be the main descriminator.

Unless there is an official/correct/dictionary pronunciation. Like
there is for French. Which is the origin of the word that sparked this
debate.

I'm just in disbelief that you are arguing that people who say "deus ex
machina" or "hors d'ouevre" are speaking English, vs. Latin and French.

"The author told a fascinating story about the human condition
up until the last chapter, where he unfortunately succombed to
happy ending through the use of a deus ex machina".

English or Latin? English sentence, composed of English words,
some of which are of foreign derivation. I can see no reason to jump
up and down and say, "but - he isn't wearing any clothes!", eh, I
mean, "but - he is speaking half Latin!".

(As a first pass. At second pass, of course, the critic in question
is just substituting long words of foreign origin for erudition.)

"If Sir would be so kind and follow me to his table? Would Sir
prefer the menu of day or one of our famous hors d'ouevres?"

English or French?

(Again, at a first pass. At second pass, probably a head waiter
at 'Le Snootier'...).

I will admit though, that phrases - especially as they get longer - get
more and more troublesome in my interpretation.

I don't jump up and down as you humorously implied, but I do think of
them as being in their original language. You can usually tell if a
word has been "adapted" or not, and if not, I consider it differently.

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-english-words-with-diacritics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan_word

Thanks.

Neither of these uses pronunciation as the main determinator.

It's somewhere on one of the two pages, that pronunciation is *one* of
the main determinators. I never said it was the only one. Spelling is
also *one* of them, and "outre'" is still in the French spelling, Mike.
The term used instead of "adaptation" (my word) is "translation," and
that seems to be the key factor in whether something is a loan word or
not. See the wikipedia article again. What do YOU think they mean by
translation?

Hmm, I read that differently. I see it as describing that as a process
where
loan words are adapted, through changes in pronunciation and spelling,
and not as a prescribtion, that loan words are not to be considered of
the borrowing language until they have gone through that process.

No, I'm on my own with that last assertion. I'm just showing you that
this separate category, "loan words," is dependent on pronunciation and
spelling. You kept asserting that pronunciation can't be used
effectively.

The rest is my own personal feeling, that if it would still fit exactly
into the "original language," then it should be considered as being
from that language still.

But you didn't answer the question - would they or would they not
pronunce the word differently? Remember, you asked if I could find
a loan word pronunced differently in different dialects...

Was that really exactly what I asked? I don't think I'd ask you
something so silly as to find a word with different pronunciations
based on the dialect. All along, I've been saying that different
dialects DO pronounce words differently, and dismissing that fact.

Well, this is quoted from an upthread post by you from July 25:

"But, are there really different "official" pronunciations between the
two? And, can you give ONE example of a loan word correctly pronounced
in one dialect, and incorrectly in another? I can't. "

And that was the challenge I was attempting to meet.

Well, I think that in the case of "outre'," which is what you used, if
someone went to the trouble of learning and pronouncing it, they would
probably pronounce it correctly.

Let me give another example, to show you what I mean. I once dated this
dunce of a girl who couldn't spell to save her life, but she overheard
a few words in different languages and wanted to use them.

She pronounced "Voila'" correctly, although she thought it was spelled
waala. She had a ridiculous southern accent, but she still pronounced
that loan word (is it even one?) correctly.

So, I think less people know of "outre'" than "voila'," so I'd venture
a guess that nearly all of them pronounce it correctly, regardless of
their dialect.

And again, the argument wasn't about French having an official
pronunciation (which is one reason I have no problem ceding the
point). The question is, whether a French loan word in English
can also (or primarely) be called English.

Also yes, primarily no. I just performed an experiment on my coworkers.
Previously, on some of my family. They are quite comfortable calling it
"French" (or whatever is "correct" ;) provided the spelling, accents,
and pronunciation haven't changed. From the official version. Which you
don't acknowledge.

I am unclear on what I haven't acknowledged?

The official version.

It can hardly be
input from your family and colleagues, which I only have second
hand. That 'outre'' is a French word? Of course it is French. That
loan word status is decided prmarily on pronunciation. Of course
not.

What???? It is based on pronunciation and spelling, i.e. translation.
Please cite what makes you still disagree with that. By your summary
above, I thought we were finally in agreement there.

(And I bet that if I were to ask the question, I could get different
answers than you do - but that is called a manipulative survey :-))

LOL. I did try to be fair about it. I mentioned that it is in most
English dictionaries, for example. It didn't seem to change most of the
responses I got.

So this is pointless.

May be it just boils down to different definitions of how to
classify words as being of a language. I classify them on
usage, you classify them on origin.

I don't classify ALL words based on origin. Just loan words.

Remember,
though, that I'm not arguing that you CANNOT call it English. I'm
simply arguing that, in the case of most or all loan words, you should
think of it primarily as a word from the language we pilfered.

All of this, of course, is entirely up to you.

And apparently more a question of priority and definition than
anything else.

I still find your definition silly and of less use :-)

I find your definition imprecise and not nearly snobbish enough. =)

Mike

-Aaron

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Home depot demands our stuff - first order
    ... This switching is common in English pronunciation; ... Bush isn't the only American president to lose the "nucular" war. ... Most importantly, spoken language is primary, not written ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Home depot demands our stuff - first order
    ... It's a funny thing about pronunciation: is it really a window into the ... This switching is common in English pronunciation; ... Bush isn't the only American president to lose the "nucular" war. ... Most importantly, spoken language is primary, not written ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: (OT) Palins "Tough Talk!"
    ... George W. Bush invariably pronounces the word "nucular." ... This switching is common in English pronunciation; ... Most importantly, spoken language is primary, not written language. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Stephen Donaldson
    ... loan words are part of the language to which they are loaned. ... from English speakers who have learned a foreign language and/or who ... pronunciation for that to be the main descriminator. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Stephen Donaldson
    ... Unless there is an official/correct/dictionary pronunciation. ... there is for French. ... through loan word status ... Unless the speaker has spent quite a while studying the language ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
Loading