[Leica] Forte and Forte: Was, Even us natives don't write Englishgood"

[jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)]

I remember during the Clarence Thomas hearings that nobody could decide
how to pronounce "harass". I had always put an accent on the second
syllable, but saying "harris" seemed to be less offensive to the media.

When I first started teaching in the 1970's, I used the NBC Guide to
Pronunciation as my referee for words having several pronunciations. I
wish I still had that book...it came in handy. For preparing for my
Bible Study group, I rely on software called "That's Easy for You to
Say". It pronounces words from the Bible as well as from other religious
texts.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA


-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Tim
Atherton
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 4:44 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: RE: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was, Even us natives don't write
Englishgood"


> Which is what I indicated earlier...if people do it incorrectly long
> enough, then the norm becomes the rule even if it is incorrect. And
I'm
> not using "old printed dictionaries". I learned it correctly 40 years
> ago.
>
> But I am a conservative in language, and would like things to remain
as
> they were, not as they are mispronounced. I even shun removing the
final
> comma from phrases such as "Larry, Moe, and Curly" as deleting that
> second comma always means that I have to go back and reread the
sentence
> again.
>
> I suppose that, before I expire, I will be reading about complimentary
> DNA. I suppose that means that adenine and guanine will be saying nice
> things about thymine and cytosine, or that you can have the DNA free,
> compliments of the house. But as long as people don't know what
> complementary means, I guess we should go with the one word they do
> understand.

The problem with this (not specifically referring to "complementary"
though
I note my 15 year old OED includes two scientific meanings - one for
physics
one for genes) is that many "correct" pronunciations or forms of usage
or
often not the only "correct" ones. As well, if one were to be entirely
rigorous, many "correct pronunciations or forms of usage turn out on
further
study to actually be "incorrect" but have become accepted because such
usage
became established perhaps 200 years ago. In addition, and again on
further
study, many words and phrases often have two forms of usage - one often
considered correct and one incorrect. Again, one often finds that they
are
merely two branches of different traditions of usage going back two,
three
or four hundred years - neither of which is either correct or incorrect
(even though there are those who, quite vocally, will declare their
particular usage is the only correct one).

tim a


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information