"Revelations"

[GSCole]

Larry,
Having once worked in the same plant, in the same work area, decades
before, I was surprised to hear 'foremens', so my attempts to
correct/clarify stressed the sounds of 'man' and 'men', breaking the
word, as in fore-men?  They corrected me, and the 'en' sound was the
only one used, whether singular or plural.  Foreman, in that area, would
involve pronouncing the 'a' as it is pronounced in 'hand'.

My interest was in gathering behavioral information, and dialect, per
se, wasn't the concern, other than clarifying a given statement.  I
wasn't in a documentary mode, concerning issues of dialect.  Besides, a
friend had warned me to not sound like a college professor.

Such is not to say that I think that you are incorrect.  And, I am not
in disagreement with the gist of your comments.  Had I been formally
trained in issues of dialect, there may have been 'tests' that could've
been employed, for purposes of a firm clarification.  As it was, I was
pushing things by trying to make a clarification.

Google shows ~120 hits on the word 'foremens', including the possessive
foremens'.
=======================

Plant language doesn't always match my academic language.  At another
northern Delaware plant, a chemical processing facility, some workers
talked about a concern with asbestiosis.  In the early 1970s, it was
close to the first time that I'd heard that word, and I didn't know that
they weren't using the correct medical term.  Their union had won a
major legal battle, and some of them had been in court.  When they said
that they were worried about asbestiosis, that was good enough for me.
Today, when I hear 'asbestiosis', I make a mental correction.

Google returns ~29 hits on 'asbestiosis', including one at the site of a
law firm.

George Cole
Shippensburg University