Assume v. Presume

af123 said:
I recall a programme that said that Welsh was the best language for morse code due to the natural redundancy in the language. Like in English when you receive a Q but miss the next letter..
Click to expand...
I'm not at all sure about that. Whether there would be a confusion of understanding if one left an l out of a double l spelling I am not qualified to comment, but the pronunciation is different. There are single l's in Welsh as well as double l's, and the singles are pronounced as in English (and I won't attempt to transliterate the pronunciation of the double-l).

Similar with d and double-d, eg the Welsh forename "Dewydd" (equivalent of the English "David"). The closest I can explain the "dd" is a long th sound as in "thee", whereas in Welsh "th" is a short sound like in "Kenneth".

The u after q in English words might be redundant, but the pronunciation of "quick" is very different from the pronunciation of "Qatar" or "Iraq".

We used to irritate the hell out of a Welsh bloke at work by talking about a place called Laneli.
 
It strikes me that what they should be doing, instead of contemplating adjusting the spelling to be down wi' da kidz, is teaching them to talk proper like wot I don't. Then they might be able to sound out the spelling of words like "yacht".

They learn that stuff pre-school though, and only have parents wot also don't tawk propa to lurn from.
 
Heard a novel (but presumably not original) phrase today, which sums up my views on the subject: theo-illogical
 
Phenomenology was the topic of last week's In Our Time. Listened to it twice and still did not accept that it was anything other than philosophers trying to justify their existence by using made up words in convoluted phrases. Except that it was something that Russell thought worthy of consideration.
 
A couple of things (not related to each other):

1. The clichéd use of the phrase "the point being...". The speaker appears to be trying to add an unwarranted air of authority.

2. The loss of the word "afire" in modern usage, people seem to be using "on fire" instead (including me). An elderly acquaintance refers to "went on fire" (past passive) when I would say "caught alight" or "caught light" - I have wondered whether "went" is a regional thing (South Wales). The active form would be "set alight" or "set light to".
 
Trev said:
Is it cow as in dough? (oh now, thats a 4 leged animal) or why isn't dough pronounced doff? Get out of that you stupid spelling police.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of an old "Hello Cheeky" sketch - with guest Frank Bough.
"Now over to Frank Bow [ˈbaʊ]. Or is it off? Noff over to Frank Bow"
 
EEPhil said:
This reminds me of an old "Hello Cheeky" sketch - with guest Frank Bough.
"Now over to Frank Bow [ˈbaʊ]. Or is it off? Noff over to Frank Bow"
Click to expand...

I like to ask Americans why they say Kansas as Can-sass, but say Arkansas as Ar-can-saw instead of Ar-can-sass.

Also why do they insist on pronouncing 'solder' as 'sodder'.

At least they spell aluminum different to aluminium.
 
antipodean said:
I like to ask Americans why they say Kansas as Can-sass, but say Arkansas as Ar-can-saw instead of Ar-can-sass.

Also why do they insist on pronouncing 'solder' as 'sodder'.

At least they spell aluminum different to aluminium.
Click to expand...

I did try asking an American colleague the (Ar)Kansas question and never got a serious answer. Probably because it was a discussion in a pub!
Solder/Sodder: Perhaps they use a soddering iron to cure piles?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top