| Author |
Message |
Rick Wotnaz
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
trio@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote in
news:1h5l0uj.10uquj16sdqgwN%trio@euronet.nl:
| Quote: | Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Donna Richoux wrote:
nancy13g <nancy13g@verizon.net> wrote:
beartiger@gmail.com wrote:
Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of
"both"? A google search shows numerous misspellings of
"both" as "bolth".
But "numerous" has to be considered as *relative*. There are
over a billion hits for "both" -- that's a lot.
both 1,260,000,000
bolth 21,700 Ratio 58064:1
That's one of the biggest ratios I've ever recorded. It means
"bolth" is rarer than "muose" and slightly more common than
"consequative".
I grant that it's still worth discussing why "bolth" should
exist at all. What nationality is doing this might be
enlightening -- maybe it ties to a regional pronunciation.
The "L" is just below the "O", if your finger slips...
Let me run a separate test to measure that effect. Picking
another common word with "o" in it:
some 2,030,000,000
solme 692 Ratio: 2,930,000:1
That's really rare, the largest ratio in all of my notes, and
several orders of magnitude different from "bolth." If the L in
"bolth" got there by a purely mechanical slippage of the
fingers, I would expect such slippage to happen with all o-words
at a comparable rate. So I think something else is going on here
besides random error.
|
It's a random effect -- a bolth out of the blue.
The 'bolth' question appears on www.linguistlist.org:
<http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-3227.html#1>
.... and a followup <http://www.sfs.nphil.uni-
tuebingen.de/linguist/issues/15/15-3323.html>
Seems to be common in places like SW England, Kansas and Denmark
(to overgeneralize, and wondering where "places like" those would
be). They're talking about pronunciations, though, not typos, so it
seems to be an undergound movement of some sort.
--
rzed
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joachim Pense
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
Am Sat, 05 Nov 2005 20:56:59 -0500 schrieb Rick Wotnaz:
["both" pronounced "bolth"]
| Quote: | Seems to be common in places like SW England, Kansas and Denmark
|
Denmark?
Joachim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:39 pm
Post subject: Re: Intrusive L [was Re: Both, pronounced "bolth"] |
|
|
Maria Conlon wrote:
| Quote: | TakenEvent wrote:
beartiger@gmail.com> wrote:
Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of "both"? A
google search shows numerous misspellings of "both" as "bolth". No
dictionary I'm aware of lists it as an alternate pronunciation.
Bolth is both odd and, around here anyway, common. I'm not sure how
it happened. It's not really any easier to say.
I've noticed an "intrusive L" in some words spoken by Texans, with
singer Willie Nelson being a good example.
For instance, in "Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain," Willie pronounces
"ember" and "remember" as if there were an L before the -mber. In
another song, "My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys," he seems to put an L
in "memories," just before the second m.
|
Sounds like a case of Texan "elm" disease.
--Jeff
| Quote: | In the same song, his "of" has
just a hint of an L before the v (f), and "step" has a fairly clear L
before the p.
This same intrusive L is something I've heard from Tennesseans, as well
-- and not just in songs, but in conversations, too. Most common: ep
becoming, almost, "elp" and em becoming, almost, "elm."
Other "sometimes"[*] examples from Willie:
Memphis as Me[L]mphis
Forgive as forgi[L]ve
Live as li[L]ve
Have as ha[L]ve
All these intrusive L's may be due to the common occurence of an actual
L preceeding m, p, and v in many words. (This says nothing about "both,"
of course.)
[*] Not present every time the word is sung or spoken.
Maria Conlon, listening to Willie Nelson ("16 Biggest Hits") even as I
type.
-- |
When people are fanatically dedicated
to political or religious faiths or any
other kind of dogmas or goals, it's
always because these dogmas or goals
are in doubt. -Robert T. Pirsig
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Lawler
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
<beartiger@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of "both"? A
google search shows numerous misspellings of "both" as "bolth". No
dictionary I'm aware of lists it as an alternate pronunciation.
|
No, it's not official. I've never seen it before.
But it's easy to see how somebody whose spelling
is maybe a little shaky might think it was spelled
that way. It's the way it's pronounced, or close
enough for government work.
In another post a few minutes ago I noted that the English high back tense
rounded vowel phoneme marked /u:/ in some UK transcription systems is
actually not significantly longer than other vowels, and in addition has a
strong labiovelar offglide, so I prefer the American transcription of /uw/.
Well, exactly the same thing is true of /o:/ ~ /ow/. Only more sow. The
[w] after [o] is very strong in most American speech. OK, so in those same
dialects post-vocalic /l/ is pronounced as a high back *unrounded* vowel
(upside-down lower-case m, if you've got an IPA chart handy), rather like
the Russian vowel 'bl'; the /l/ has lost the lateral gesture altogether and
keeps only the velarization of the normal post-vocalic allophone.
'Bowl' in these dialects ends in a vowel that's very very similar to [w];
consequently lots of people pronounce (violin) 'bow' and 'bowl' the same,
as /bow/, so the L seems to become silent after /o/. (BTW, how does the
Irish actor Colm Meany pronounce his first name?)
We're used to having sort of silent L's; think of 'calm' and 'balm',
homophonous to 'com' and 'bomb' in my dialect. So it's very easy to
imagine that somebody encountering [bowT] hears it as /bolT/ and later
spells it that way.
Incorrectly, of course. But phonetically.
-John Lawler U of Michigan Linguistics Dept
http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler/disclaimers.html
#include disclaimers.h |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:45 pm
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
John Lawler <jlawler@umich.edu> wrote:
| Quote: | 'Bowl' in these dialects ends in a vowel that's very very similar to [w];
consequently lots of people pronounce (violin) 'bow' and 'bowl' the same,
as /bow/, so the L seems to become silent after /o/. (BTW, how does the
Irish actor Colm Meany pronounce his first name?)
|
Pretty much like "column," said Irish contributor Brian Goggin. To be
precise, he said:
I don't, I think, pronounce "Colm" and "column" in exactly the same
way, but I'm not sure that I understand ASCII IPA well enough to
enable me to show the difference.
--
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 10:12 pm
Post subject: Re: Intrusive L [was Re: Both, pronounced "bolth"] |
|
|
"Maria Conlon" <maria.c-b@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:EXfbf.5337$8W.885@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
| Quote: | TakenEvent wrote:
beartiger@gmail.com> wrote:
Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of "both"? A
google search shows numerous misspellings of "both" as "bolth". No
dictionary I'm aware of lists it as an alternate pronunciation.
Bolth is both odd and, around here anyway, common. I'm not sure how
it happened. It's not really any easier to say.
I've noticed an "intrusive L" in some words spoken by Texans, with
singer Willie Nelson being a good example.
For instance, in "Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain," Willie pronounces
"ember" and "remember" as if there were an L before the -mber. In
another song, "My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys," he seems to put an L
in "memories," just before the second m. In the same song, his "of" has
just a hint of an L before the v (f), and "step" has a fairly clear L
before the p.
This same intrusive L is something I've heard from Tennesseans, as
well -- and not just in songs, but in conversations, too. Most common:
ep becoming, almost, "elp" and em becoming, almost, "elm."
Other "sometimes"[*] examples from Willie:
Memphis as Me[L]mphis
Forgive as forgi[L]ve
Live as li[L]ve
Have as ha[L]ve
All these intrusive L's may be due to the common occurence of an actual
L preceeding m, p, and v in many words. (This says nothing about "both,"
of course.)
[*] Not present every time the word is sung or spoken.
Maria Conlon, listening to Willie Nelson ("16 Biggest Hits") even as I
type.
|
One of my favorite songs (not sung by Willie Nelson, though that might be
interesting) begins with the lyrics "I'll write you a letter -- tomorrow."
It comes out sounding like "I'll write you a leather tomallo." Nasty, nasty
l's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:38 pm
Post subject: Re: Intrusive L [was Re: Both, pronounced "bolth"] |
|
|
"Maria Conlon" <maria.c-b@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:EXfbf.5337$8W.885@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
| Quote: | TakenEvent wrote:
beartiger@gmail.com> wrote:
Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of "both"?
A
google search shows numerous misspellings of "both" as "bolth". No
dictionary I'm aware of lists it as an alternate pronunciation.
Bolth is both odd and, around here anyway, common. I'm not sure how
it happened. It's not really any easier to say.
I've noticed an "intrusive L" in some words spoken by Texans, with
singer Willie Nelson being a good example.
For instance, in "Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain," Willie pronounces
"ember" and "remember" as if there were an L before the -mber. In
another song, "My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys," he seems to put an
L in "memories," just before the second m. In the same song, his "of"
has just a hint of an L before the v (f), and "step" has a fairly
clear L before the p.
This same intrusive L is something I've heard from Tennesseans, as
well -- and not just in songs, but in conversations, too. Most common:
ep becoming, almost, "elp" and em becoming, almost, "elm."
Other "sometimes"[*] examples from Willie:
Memphis as Me[L]mphis
Forgive as forgi[L]ve
Live as li[L]ve
Have as ha[L]ve
All these intrusive L's may be due to the common occurence of an
actual L preceeding m, p, and v in many words. (This says nothing
about "both," of course.)
[*] Not present every time the word is sung or spoken.
|
I agree there is "something there". However, I don't interpret the
sound as an "l", but as some residual diphthong. (I associate a lot of
prolonging and twisting of the vowels with southern dialects, and
Australia. Forgive me for stereotyping.) Kind of an "eo"mber (or
"ew"mber). But, for sure, the intruding "l" in bolth could be heard by
some in the same way. I haven't heard "bolth", but I certainly hear a
very long "o"(as in bowth) when I hear the word.
Perhaps the spellers of the word aren't acquainted with "loath, quoth,
troth". Can't think of very many words with that sound, and I do
recognize that my understanding of the sounds may differ among regions
of the US, and especially of UK. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:16 am
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
"John Lawler" <jlawler@umich.edu> wrote in message
news:6jobf.1267$yb2.947@news.itd.umich.edu...
| Quote: | beartiger@gmail.com> wrote:
Has any authority observed this alternate pronunciation of "both"? A
google search shows numerous misspellings of "both" as "bolth". No
dictionary I'm aware of lists it as an alternate pronunciation.
No, it's not official. I've never seen it before.
But it's easy to see how somebody whose spelling
is maybe a little shaky might think it was spelled
that way. It's the way it's pronounced, or close
enough for government work.
In another post a few minutes ago I noted that the English high back
tense
rounded vowel phoneme marked /u:/ in some UK transcription systems is
actually not significantly longer than other vowels, and in addition
has a
strong labiovelar offglide, so I prefer the American transcription of
/uw/.
Well, exactly the same thing is true of /o:/ ~ /ow/. Only more sow.
The
[w] after [o] is very strong in most American speech. OK, so in those
same
dialects post-vocalic /l/ is pronounced as a high back *unrounded*
vowel
(upside-down lower-case m, if you've got an IPA chart handy), rather
like
the Russian vowel 'bl'; the /l/ has lost the lateral gesture
altogether and
keeps only the velarization of the normal post-vocalic allophone.
'Bowl' in these dialects ends in a vowel that's very very similar to
[w];
consequently lots of people pronounce (violin) 'bow' and 'bowl' the
same,
as /bow/, so the L seems to become silent after /o/. (BTW, how does
the
Irish actor Colm Meany pronounce his first name?)
We're used to having sort of silent L's; think of 'calm' and 'balm',
homophonous to 'com' and 'bomb' in my dialect. So it's very easy to
imagine that somebody encountering [bowT] hears it as /bolT/ and later
spells it that way.
|
This is just what I was saying (about the -ol- in bolth, in reply to
Maria's hearing of Willie Nelson's "embers", etc. Except I hear more
like a "-w" where she hears the intrusinve "l"). But you express it so
much more clearly.
Of course, in "calm, balm, palm" and other such I pronounce the "l",
while others don't, but I attribute that to the pronunciation of the "a"
as distinct from the "a" in cot. I am in Areff's CINC cohort, (calm is
cot), while the people I hear saying the above words without the "l"
have a much "lighter" sound, than my "darker" one. The "l" tends to
occlude, or darken the vowel, approaching the diphthong state of "aw"
(for me).
Then there is "salmon". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:08 am
Post subject: Re: Both, pronounced "bolth" |
|
|
Pat Durkin wrote:
<snip>
| Quote: | Of course, in "calm, balm, palm" and other such I pronounce the "l",
|
As do I, FWIW.
J |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in