On OEDILF Bob Hale, in workshopping one of my and Mephistopheles's limericks, thought the rhyming words didn't work because they were homophonic. Well, Meph and Bob decided that it was only a matter of UK/US pronunciation and that was that.

However, when I looked up homophonic, I found it means "having the same sound." Isn't that a good thing with a rhyme? I understand why they don't accept homonyms, but why not homophones? Homophones aren't the same as homonyms...or are they? In AHD they call "night" and Knight" a homophone, and I'd call them homonyms. I am totally confused.

The words were "due," "true," and "Jew."

Knight and night are homophones because they are pronounced alike, though they are spelled differently.

Mole (the animal) and mole (the stone wall used as a breakwater) are homonyms because they are spelled alike.

Jew, true, and due are words that rhyme. Just because Jew has a different spelling, doesn't mean it doesn't rhyme with due and true. What madness are they up to in these "workshops"?

quote:

The words were "due," "true," and "Jew."

I pronounce due and Jew exactly the same, but most Americans I've heard pronounce due as "doo".

I suppose the OEDILF people thought that, if the first two were pronounced in the American way, then they wouldn't quite rhyme with Jew and if the first one was pronounced in the English way, then that and Jew wouldn't quite rhyme with true.

The OEDILF seem to be extremely picky .

Perhaps Bob will be the best to explain it since he was the one who brought up the issue. Here is the limerick:

Adolf Hitler condemned every Jew
To the horrors of Auschwitz...it's true;
There, the Problem, alas,
Was resolved using gas,
So a moment of silence is due.

Bob said that it would be more powerful without the homophonic rhymes. That's where I first became confused because I thought homophones were a good thing when rhyming! Then Meph (who co-wrote the limerick with me) said, that Jew/true/due all sound "different" to his ear. And then Bob said that it must be a US/UK difference in pronunciation and said to ignore the comment. Perhaps in the UK Jew/due are pronounced exactly the same? Is that the issue maybe? Would they be homophones in the UK, but not in the US maybe?

Di, we were posting at the same time. Okay...that's it. The British pronounce "Jew" and "due" the same.

I think they are very picky about rhymes, and yet at other times they can accept near-rhymes (is there a word for them?) like my, "him to live" and "primitive." It seems to just depend. I get annoyed with the homonym/homophone rule, though.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh: Perhaps in the UK Jew/due are pronounced exactly the same?

In defense of OEDILFers, yes, we definitely adhere to a higher set of standards than your average limerick website. I've made a fairly extensive tour of them and can honestly report that the large majority are not worth one's time. And while the workshopping process can certainly be maddening, the results speak for themselves. It is my firm belief that some of the best limericks in the English-speaking world today are being written, and strenuously workshopped, for The OEDILF. Furthermore, you would be hard-pressed to find an OEDILFer who didn't say that he or she has become a better writer because of the editing we provide each other. True, some people can't take it. We've lost a number of good writers who chafed under the workshopping process and there have been others who never joined because of it. That's only to be expected and obviously no site is going to please everyone.

Now, regarding "Jew/due," it is also true that one of the biggest problems we face is the fact that The OEDILF is an international project with writers now in more than a dozen countries. As you have covered here on numerous occasions, our beloved English varies greatly from locale to locale. Usually I can adjust my hearing to accommodate these changes. I say "AD-ver-TIZE-ment" but someone else wants it as "ad-VER-tiz-ment"? No problem. We do this every day.

BUT! Kalleh, the problem you bring up completely stumps me. How are the words "Jew" and "due" pronounced so as to be homophones? The first begins with a "J" sound and the second with a "D" sound and my inner ear cannot force them into any form in which they are even remotely homophonic. I probably should post this over there as well.

Any enlightenment, anyone?

Just to follow up, Bob Hale answered my question in that thread Kaleh mentioned:
______

US/UK diff in pron on "due" which in the UK starts with either a dy or a j sound depending on region rather than the d sound which I now recall is the US version.
_____

Running the word "due" through my "inner Arthur Treacher ear," the device I use to try to approximate British speech, I can finally hear the homophone version of "Jew/due" but it's not one I would have heard on my own in a hundred years.

quote:

Originally posted by zmjezhd:
Knight and night are homophones because they are pronounced alike, though they are spelled differently.

Mole (the animal) and mole (the stone wall used as a breakwater) are homonyms because they are spelled alike.

Jew, true, and due are words that rhyme. Just because Jew has a different spelling, doesn't mean it doesn't rhyme with due and true. What madness are they up to in these "workshops"?

Just as a point, I am perfectly well aware of the meaning of "homophone". I was the one workshopping there (something I rarely do) and, in England, "due" and "jew" are homophones - not rhymes, not near rhymes, actual honest to goodness homophones. I had forgotten that this isn't the case in the US.
I too feel that too much workshopping goes too far but I rather resent the implication in that last sentence as, of all the workshoppers, I am the one who is most relaxed about word and line stresses, near-rhymes, homophonic rhymes (which this is if you live this side of the pond) and so on.

I'm aware that not everyone here likes the OEDILF but rather as I didn't check my US/UK differences before jumping in with my OEDILF post you haven't checked them before jumping in here.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BobHale,

quote:

Just as a point, I am perfectly well aware of the meaning of "homophone". I was the one workshopping there (something I rarely do) and, in England, "due" and "jew" are homophones - not rhymes, not near rhymes, actual honest to goodness homophones. I had forgotten that this isn't the case in the US.

Sorry, Bob, I was explaining to Kalleh what the difference between homophone and homonym was, because she seemed confused.

As for due and Jew[/i], some Yanks pronounce due /'djuw/ not as a homophone of []dew[/i] /'duw/. This reminds me of Early Modern English critics saying that Chaucer was not a very good poet because he so often got his meter and rhymes wrong. They didn't realize that Chaucer's English was different from theirs. La!

quote:

Originally posted by zmjezhd:
This reminds me of Early Modern English critics saying that Chaucer was not a very good poet because he so often got his meter and rhymes wrong. They didn't realize that Chaucer's English was different from theirs. La!

Indeed. And, of course, it's thanks to writers like Chaucer and their "bad rhymes" that we can make intelligent guesses as to what language actually sounded like before the invention of sound recording.

quote:

This reminds me of Early Modern English critics saying that Chaucer was not a very good poet because he so often got his meter and rhymes wrong. They didn't realize that Chaucer's English was different from theirs. La!

I studied Chaucer and his contemporaries at University and I found it fascinating. It's very Germanic in that all the letters are pronounced in words such as "knight" (which is more like "kuh-nikt") and "Aprille" ("Ap-rill-uh").

Even 200 years later, in Shakespeare's time, pronunciation was still markedly different from modern speech. A few months ago, the reconstructed Globe Theatre in London staged a production of Troilus and Cressida "in the original". I've found a site which contains a short talk (by an American), giving examples of the pronunciation (sound clip in Real Player or Windows Media Player).

Here is a BBC article about Shakespeare's dialect and probable accent which also has a short sound clip.

quote:

It's very Germanic in that all the letters are pronounced in words such as "knight" (which is more like "kuh-nikt") and "Aprille" ("Ap-rill-uh").

Not necessarily a Germanic characteristic, but just the mark of an orthography closer to its origins than one ours. Folks don't tend to create a spelling system like ours or the French one to write down a language. It evolves over time and being conservative preserves spellings which are no longer phonemic.

quote:

Originally posted by zmjezhd: It evolves over time and ... preserves spellings which are no longer phonemic.

This being zmj speaking, I couldn't assume that 'phonemic' was a typo. Checking shows that it's indeed a valid word.

But I don't understand the difference between phonemic and phonetic. zmj, can you help?

quote:

But I don't understand the difference between phonemic and phonetic. zmj, can you help?

A language's phonology, i.e., the system of sounds one makes in speaking the language can be described phonetically or phonemically. The former is more detailed to the actual sounds being produced, which are not usually apparant to the lay person. (See the two links above to Wikipedia articles for a better description.) The latter is closer to how the speaking person conceptualizes the sounds of her language.

Let's take three words in American English: pot, spot, and bought. Most lay persons would say that the p in pot and spot were the same, but phonologists would note that they are different. The p in pot is voiceless aspirated bilabial stop [pʰ], whereas the p in spot is a voiceless unaspirated bilabial stop [p]. Now what about the b in bought[/i]? It turns out to be a voiceless unaspirated bilabial stop [p], too. But this is discussing phones phonetically. In discussing them phonemically, there are two phonemes p in pot and spot and b in bought. Phonoligst say, when describing English that the phoneme /p/ has the phonetic realization of [pʰ] before a vowel and [p] after an s. These are called p's allophones. In fact there is another allophone of p at the ends of words like top pronounced in isolation: an unreleased voiceless bilabial stop [p̚].

The best way to hear this differences is to download a sound editor and record yourself pronouncing the words, and then edit them. For example, remove the s from spot and hear how the result sounds more like bought than pot. Sans software, you can hold your hand in front of your mouth and notice the small puff of air which occurs after the p in pot does not occur after the p in spot. You could also seek out a speaker of an IE language from India. Most of these languages (e.g., Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, Urdu) distinguish phonemically between [p, pʰ, b, bʰ]. They can usually hear that you're using [pʰ] in pot, but [p] in spot.

Well, as Phoebe once said on Friends about Monica, "I've awakened the beast!"

Alright, I didn't mean to criticize OEDILF. CJ is right when he says, "Furthermore, you would be hard-pressed to find an OEDILFer who didn't say that he or she has become a better writer because of the editing we provide each other." That's true. Of my 90+ limericks, there is only 1 that I can think of that, in my opinion, became worse after being workshopped. The rest either improved (some greatly!) or stayed about the same. Those odds are good!

Yet, I do have some disagreements, and I have let them be known on that board (I am sure my fellow wordcrafters know that!) One of my pet peeves is that I think homophones should be considered rhymes. Aren't "bow" and "bough" and "rain," "reign" and "rein" more fun than "fight," "light," and "night?" They are to me. The latter are mediocre to me, while, when used right, the former can be spectacular.

quote:

of all the workshoppers, I am the one who is most relaxed about word and line stresses, near-rhymes, homophonic rhymes (which this is if you live this side of the pond) and so on.

Yes, that's true. Bob is very flexible, which I always appreciate.

So, Bob, in England do "d" and "j" always sound the same? For example, are "dump" and "jump" homophones? What about soft "g" words, like "gin?" What is the point of "j" and "d" then? Is there a subtle difference? If so, then "Jew" and "due" wouldn't be homophones, would they?

Speaking of rhymes, I workshopped this fantastic limerick of Chris Doyle's last night; his rhymes were outstanding!

Here's a fossil—the aegyptopithecus.
Though this primate (pre-Paleolithic) is
Quite clearly extinct,
Once he puckered and winked
At his pals before planting a mythic kiss.

The author's note: The aegyptopithecus (EE-jip-toh-PITH-uh-kis) was a small, tree-dwelling animal who lived about 33 million years ago and is thought to have resembled the modern-day lemur, except for a full set of 32 teeth. Little is known of his penchant for smooching.
~ Chris Doyle, from the OEDILF

quote:

So, Bob, in England do "d" and "j" always sound the same? For example, are "dump" and "jump" homophones? What about soft "g" words, like "gin?" What is the point of "j" and "d" then? Is there a subtle difference? If so, then "Jew" and "due" wouldn't be homophones, would they?

Since I'm the only person online at the moment, can I leap in here and pre-empt Bob (sorry Bob)?

"Dump" and "jump" are not homophones in England. They're pronounced exactly as written.

"Gin" is pronounced like "jin" with a soft "g". There's another example of a homophone with "Jew" in English and that's "dew", which is also pronounced "jew" in English.

So "due", "dew" and "Jew" are all homophones in British English, but people with "higher class" accents pronounce the first two as "dee-yew". They're the sort of people who pronounce "Tuesday" as "Tee-yoozday", rather than "Choozday" and "constable" as "kunstable".

quote:

"constable" as "kunstable".

And how, I prithee, do they pronounce "constipate?"

quote:

Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy:

quote:

"constable" as "kunstable".

And how, I prithee, do they pronounce "constipate?"

! There's not just a regional difference in accents in Britain, there's still a definite class difference too - although the influence of TV is gradually smoothing it out.

Listen to these and these audio clips for examples of what I mean.

It's to do the U as in UNIT with the Y sound in front of it.

The sound change in England (and Australia etc.) is only in the groups DU and TU (or equivalent spellings like DEW and TEW), which were formerly pronounced DYOO and TYOO.

This only applies when the vowel is long OO as in FOOD. So words like DUST, TUN don't come in here, nor do PUTTY, BUCK, MUTTON, NUN etc., nor do PUSH, PUT.

In DU and TU the old pronunciation DYOO, TYOO is still used by some older or more conservative speakers in England. (I use them in careful speech, but JOO, CHOO casually.) In America these long ago became DOO, TOO: DUTY = DOOTY, TUNE = TOON. In England more recently they've become JOO, CHOO: DUTY = JOOTY, TUNE = CHOON.

With PU BU MU FU VU almost everyone still pronounces the Y: PURE = PYOORE, BEAUTY = BYOOTY, MUSIC = MYOOSIC, FEW = FYOO, VIEW = VYOO. (There are small bits of England where you hear BOOTY, MOOSIC.)

NYOO (NEW) lost its Y in America to become NOO but hasn't changed in most of England.

Former LYOO and RYOO have lost it almost everywhere: very very few people say LURE as LYOOR rather than LOOR, and no-one says RYULE any more.

SYOO has mostly become either SOO or SHOO depending on the word (SUIT vs SUGAR), and on dialect (ASSUME = AmE ASSOOM, BrE either ASYOOM or ASHOOM).

Very VERY interesting, aput

Just to be complete, we could also look at the -OO sound when it follows the C, G, H, W and Z sounds (as in Cue, Coo, exCuse; Goo; Hue, HUman; Woo and Zoo).

Also, it can follow combined sounds: BLue; BRew; CHew; CLue; DRew; FLew; FRuit; GLue; GRew; PLural; PRudence; SCrew (or SCHool); SCRew; SHoe; SLew (or SLoop); SMooch; SNoop; SPew; STew; THew; THRew (or THRough); TRue.

I imagine each of these has its own pattern of regional variation?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: wordnerd,

Going from a /dj/ to a /Z/ or a /dZ/ is a common enough occurrence: e.g., Latin diurnus to French jour or Italian giorno. But how do Britons pronounce the verb do? I also not that while American English has issue /'ISuw/, British English usually has /'Isjuw/. The opposite of what you would imagine.

quote:

how do Britons pronounce the verb do?

More or less as DOO, as in ZOO, but perhaps with a slightly shorter vowel-sound.

Even though CJ on the OEDILF board said that he pronounces "dew" and "due" differently, for me "dew," "do," and "due" are homophones (I almost wrote "homophobes" ).

What about 2 syllable words? Are there any 2-syllable homophones? I wonder if OEDILF would consider words like "purloin" and "sirloin" to be worthy of a limerick. Do you know Bob? Or Richard? I surely would, but then I am apparently more flexible than the rest of them.

The YOO sound still exists in some words in America. I was taught many years ago that YOO was the long o sound, and is used in such words as cute (KYOOT), cue (KYOO), new and knew (NYOO), huge (HYOOJ), human (HYOOMAN), duty (DYOOTE), coupon (CYOOPON), albumen (ALBYOOMIN), prelude (PRELYOOD),and deluge (DELYOOJ).

These words are also pronounced with the OO sound. with the exceptions or albumin, cute and cue. If cute and cue were pronounced with the OO sound, that would make them indistinguishable from coot and coo, which bings to mind this sentence: "That was her cue to coo softly in the cute coot's ear."

And that reminded me of Sunflower and Asa. How's the old coot doing, anyhow, Sunflower?

Tinman

altar and alter
baron and barren
compliment and complement
stationary and stationery
descent and dissent
lessen and lesson
weather and whether
and one I just discovered with google

miner, minor and mynah

quote:

miner, minor and mynah

Just in UK English. In US English, mynah is the odd bird out.

quote:

Originally posted by tinman:
( this sentence: "That was her cue to coo softly in the cute coot's ear."

And that reminded me of Sunflower and Asa. How's the old coot doing, anyhow, Sunflower?

Tinman

I hear he's cleaning house for my impending move (which is less than 3 weeks away). Wish us luck on our wild ride across the country with my dogs and cats. We're just hoping we can find enough gasoline to get there from here!

quote:

I hear he's cleaning house for my impending move (which is less than 3 weeks away)

Hmmm, yes, I have heard about that barrage of cleaning.


I asked the wrong question above about the rhyming of 2- or more syllable words. I used "sirloin" and "purloin" as an example, and of course they'd be okay because "sir" and "pur" are different. However, how about the "-ability" and "-ality" words, such as "ability," "virility," etc., or "mentality," "fatality," etc.? Do those count as rhyming words in OEDILF?