Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
They are all wet... Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted
Here is a sentence in the Chicago Tribune. It should be whet, right?
quote:
But we do hope their stories wet your appetite to learn to ask the soldiers who fought over there and the civilians who joined the grand collective effort here on behalf of freedom - ask them what it was like.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
Yup. It's a common mondegreen.


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10940 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
But it's incorrect, right? This was in an editorial, but of course I can't link to the Tribune anymore.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Mondegreen, yes, but not a homonym. We seem not to hear the "h" in whet, which, if logic prevailed in pronunciation, would be before the "w." Same goes for all of the "wh" words in English that I can think of except "whore," wherein the "h" is silent. And how many of us pronounce "pen" and "pin" differently? I hear most people say,"pin" for both.

Yes, Kalleh, Tribune, mighty Tribune, has struck out.
 
Posts: 6187 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of zmježd
posted Hide Post
The wine-whine merger is complete in most English-speaking parts of the world except for some parts of the States and Canada. Who, whom, whose, are like whore in that the {w} is not pronounced but the {h} is. Along with the pen-pin merger, there are not "mistakes" but regional varieties of pronunciation.

Wet in the opening post is a spelling mistake, not a pronunciation one.


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
 
Posts: 5148 | Location: R'lyehReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by zmježd:



Wet in the opening post is a spelling mistake, not a pronunciation one.
'Tis so, Z, but brought about by correct spelling of an incorrectly heard word, I suspect. If one hears, "whet" out of context from most folks, I bet they would write "wet." Now, what would you do with a wet whetstone? Smile
 
Posts: 6187 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Geoff:
... "whore," wherein the "h" is silent.


The h is silent?
 
Posts: 2879 | Location: Shoreline, WA, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by tinman:
quote:
Originally posted by Geoff:
... "whore," wherein the "h" is silent.


The h is silent?
What? You're never heard of a wore? Big Grin I goophed!
 
Posts: 6187 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of zmježd
posted Hide Post
If one hears, "whet" out of context from most folks, I bet they would write "wet."

That's because we have a worthless spelling "system".


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
 
Posts: 5148 | Location: R'lyehReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
The whole "h" sound is interesting. Shu often doesn't pronounce the "h" in a word that begins with "h", as in uman, instead of human. I always pronounce the "h".

With "wh" vs. "w" I tend not to say the words differently, though again Shu does. I do pronounce whore with an "h," though.

As for the original question on whet, I don't think it's a spelling mistake. I'd consider it a syntax mistake, though of course we don't know for sure. Editors tend to catch spelling errors, but if they think it's the correct usage, they won't catch it.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright © 2002-12