Mark A Mandel mam at THEWORLD.COM
Wed Sep 10 21:44:21 UTC 2003

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Dennis R. Preston wrote:

#My point is that "sez" does not reflect pronunciation at all in the
#influence it has on the reader. Even though the speaker says "sez,"
#the "respelling" causes the reader to think that the speaker being
#represented by the respelling is dull, uneducated, back-woodsish,
#etc..... So eye-dialect (still 'traditionally') is defined as a
#respelling which DOES NOT reflect any pronunciation different from
#one suggested by the "standard" spelling.

Exactly: does not reflect any pronunciation DIFFERENT FROM ONE SUGGESTED
BY THE "STANDARD" SPELLING. Not "do[es] not reflect pronunciation", as
you wrote earlier. "Difference" is part of the definition.

-- Mark A. Mandel
   Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania

More information about the Ads-l mailing list