For words ending in "-ity" is it ~t or ~d

[Tom Zurinskas]

Thanks James,

I agree with what you say.  Citation speech versus normal speech- which is
best to represent in a dictionary?  Funny thing is that m-w.com while going
the great extra step in providing voice files of every word (again a
marvelous resource) illustrates the problem.

In my dictionary, which is the VOA dictionary plus truespel for
pronunciation, I show both.

Truespel is just a simple notation.  If it sounds like a "k" it goes in the
k-bin.  I even treat "ng" as being not a separate phoneme, but allophones of
"n" and "g".

Truespel notation is OK for dictionaries, but even at this level I find
pronunciation may have changed and current notation not kept up in current
dictionaries.  Perhaps current dictionaries want to merely keep citation
spelling and not bother with new updates.  Consistency regardless of
reality?

Tom Zurinskas, USA - CT20, TN3, NJ33, FL5+
See truespel.com - and the 4  truespel books plus "Occasional Poems" at
authorhouse.com.





>From: James Harbeck <jharbeck at SYMPATICO.CA>
>Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>Subject: Re: For words ending in "-ity" is it ~t or ~d
>Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 23:00:07 -0400
>
>---------------------- Information from the mail header
>-----------------------
>Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>Poster:       James Harbeck <jharbeck at SYMPATICO.CA>
>Subject:      Re: For words ending in "-ity" is it ~t or ~d
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >I found differences between the sounds in spoken words and the phonetic
> >spellings. No one here seems to dispute the fact that "ity" is pronounced
> >rather with a d-like sound as I've pointed out.
>
>Well, there seems to have been a certain level of dispute over
>whether that sound is a tap (or flap) or a solid [d]... But if you're
>designing a new spelling system to reflect the way things are really
>said, you'll want to reflect the way thing sare said when they're
>said carefully, I presume. All sorts of things change when people
>speak casually. In English, both /t/ and /d/ have a tap as an
>allophone, but of course it's not a separate phoneme. Now, if you say
>"I see disparity in this parody," and someone else says "What? I
>can't hear you," you'll probably say [dIspErIti] with a clear, crisp
>[t] and [pEr at di] with a definite d, even though you had a moment
>before most likely said them both with the same sequence of sounds
>starting at [p]. Naturally, this more careful form is also what the
>dictionaries tend to reflect.
>
>When you hear people saying the -ity endings with the sound in
>question, you're hearing the relaxed way of saying it, but how do you
>propose to get the target articulation, the one that they have in
>mind and that guides their  pronunciation but that they seldom
>articulate in full detail? I know that the relaxed form influences
>understanding of the citation form; I've certainly seen the spelling
>"celebrady" for "celebrity." But among well-educated users, aware of
>the spelling etc., the target articulation, the one that they would
>shout or say to someone hard of hearing or say in the most formal way
>possible, will have a [t]. And will yet be a tap or flap most of the
>rest of the time.
>
> >  There is no other way to
> >simply notate that sound other than with a "d".  English dictionaries do
>not
> >have a symbol for an r flap or tap.  It does not exist in Engilsh and I
>find
> >it strange that anyone would say that it's a flap when native tongue
> >Americans don't go through the tongue motions to make a flap in their
>normal
> >phoneme set.
>
>Well, that "anyone" includes thousands of phoneticians, I reckon.
>"Murder" is normally said with a flap by many, perhaps most,
>Americans and Canadians. You can say that it isn't, but you're up
>against a lot of experts who disagree with you. It's not a motion
>that requires a lingual detour when we use it; the entire reason for
>its use is that it takes less effort. But that flap is not a separate
>phoneme, certainly; it's an allophone, in this case of /t/, in other
>cases of /d/ and even at times /n/ (though nasalized in that case).
>We have no shortage of allophone that not only aren't in the phoneme
>sent but that some people will even think they can't say -- the
>semivowel that /l/ usually turns into when Albertans say "Calgary,"
>for instance.
>
> >A tap, I suppose, is just a short d.  No doubt many sounds have
>allophones
> >(slightly different versions of the same sound usually usually due to
> >interference with adjacent phonemes).  But dictionary notation doesn't
>get
> >so technical.
>
>Yes, I think we're in agreement on that much. Dictionaries aren't
>really detailed phonetic expositions. They're references with a
>certain purpose in mind, and exact description of casual speech isn't
>it.
>
>James Harbeck.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail to go? Get your Hotmail, news, sports and much more!
http://mobile.msn.com

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org