I recently saw "troglodyte" used in the Chicago Tribune: "The Right Wing Watch is reserved for the worst of the worst troglodytes--people who would 'roll back' government and society to [their] liking.
It has also been used a few times on this board, all by CJ Strolin, e.g. in: "My two cents: I pronounce the 'H' in 'vehicle' but it's a soft 'H'. I also pronounce the 'soft H' (is there such a term?) in 'whale' and have been soundly criticized by troglodyte acquaintances for speaking (to use a Britishism) 'posh.'
Dictionary.com defines it as: "A member of a fabulous or prehistoric race of people that lived in caves, dens, or holes. A person considered to be reclusive, reactionary, out of date, or brutish."
From those definitions I could see it meaning out-of-date, reactionary, or coming from a fabulous race. Or does fabulous have another meaning here? How do you use it?
quote:Originally posted by Kalleh: Dictionary.com defines it as: "A member of a fabulous or prehistoric race of people that lived in caves, dens, or holes. A person considered to be reclusive, reactionary, out of date, or brutish."
From those definitions I could see it meaning out-of-date, reactionary, or coming from a fabulous race. Or does fabulous have another meaning here? How do you use it?
This definition is extremely misleading since it refers to the original meaning of the word "fabulous": "as if from a fable." Similarly, "fantasic" originally meant "as if from a fantasy."
The fact that both words are now nothing more than synonyms for "neat-o" diminishes our language but there's no turning back the clock on either of them. Likewise "decimated," a perfectly good word that orignially meant "decreased by one tenth (deci- = 1/10)." A radio report just today mentioned that 90% of the buildings in a war zone had been decimated over the past few years which, really, is not all that horrible. What the speaker meant, of course, was that 90% of the buildings were more or less 90% destroyed, another kettle of fish entirely.
Troglodytes (not to be confused with rock formations hanging upside-down in caves) are your typical mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, monosyllabic, hairy-backed, monobrowed, IQ challenged individuals who, on those rare occasions when they somehow find their way into fancy restaurants, will drink from their finger bowls and complain that their Budweiser is weaker than usual. Soccer hooligans come to mind but, thankfully, not often.
his definition is extremely misleading since it refers to the original meaning of the word "fabulous": "as if from a fable." Similarly, "fantasic" originally meant "as if from a fantasy."
The fact that both words are now nothing more than synonyms for "neat-o" diminishes our language but there's no turning back the clock on either of them. ______________________________________________
CJ, I'll have to admit to dragging my knuckles, since the context in which these two words were used made me think of their original definitions, NOT "neat-o."
Dictionaries generally give the most common pronunciation of a word, the second most common, and so on. M-W gives both pronunciations of whale, the pronounced h first, the silent h second. I learned in school many years ago that the h should be pronounced in words such as whale, where, when, and what, and that's the way I pronounce them.
This etymology site shows that whale came from the Old English hwael, which supports (in my mind, anyway) the pronunciation of the h. It shows similar etymologies for other wh words. One that surprised me was wharf. I've never pronounced the h in wharf, but the etymology would indicate that it should be pronounced. Indeed, M-W favors the pronounced h over the silent h.
wh started to merge with w a couple of hundred years ago. The difference survives to this day in Scotland. It used to survive in the USA but the merger has been rapid over the last generation or so. Some older speakers of RP in England keep them distinct.
CJ says he pronounces "Wales" and "whales" differently, along with "horse" and "hoarse." I can't even conjure up a different pronunciation in my mind! Do you Brits pronounce them differently, too?
quote:Originally posted by Kalleh: CJ says he pronounces "Wales" and "whales" differently, along with "horse" and "hoarse." I can't even conjure up a different pronunciation in my mind! Do you Brits pronounce them differently, too?
I don't. I know how to pronounce the first pair differently (because I have heard it done) but I don't do it. The other two I can't even imagine what he means without hearing him say them.
The difference between horse and hoarse is that some speakers use their hoe vowel in the latter. So for them hoarse is like hopes. This distinction has been lost in the main accents of England and North America. It still existed in standard English in the early twentieth century, and is still used in Scotland, Ireland, and to a lesser extent in other places.
Words ending in -ore have the other sound for them, but also a lot of others like port, pork, sport, force, which don't rhyme with short, fork.
Aput, I'm impressed by your knowledge of pronunciations! Would you please add a line or two to your biograghical information so that we might know from whence this knowledge comes?
Yes, I agree with Asa. We have had some server problems this week (slowness; difficulty logging on), but they are quite rare and should be solved now. Please don't let last week's experiences here scare you away, aput. We love that kind of discussion! You should have been here when we discussed the number of syllables in "fire!"
I can see how "whale" and "Wales" can be pronounced differently. I am still working on "hoarse" and "horse" though. I hear what you are saying, aput, but when I say them, I don't hear that difference.
Hm, well, rather an odd question: where does my knowledge of accents come from? Study, reading, the usual. What would be the alternative?
Admittedly I'm taking an English accents course with the world authority on English accents, but that's just icing on the cake. : )
So anyway, in today's lecture he put up a map and showed that the distinct wh sound in American dialects is these days (1997 survey) largely confined to the coastal states from Virginia to Louisiana, and a bit around Chicago.
My own knowledge of accents comes from similar sources, and, as in the case of the distinct /wh/, from personal immersion experience. Those who pronounce "where" and "wear" the same are a distinct minority. In my opinion, the professor's map would be more accurate if it included the Mid-West and West of the U.S.A.
Perhaps we can hear from other members of this community who live in Washington, Oregon, Illinois, Ohio, .... what watt? which witch? why Y ?
[This message was edited by jerry thomas on Mon Jan 26th, 2004 at 11:23.]
Posts: 6708 | Location: Kehena Beach, Hawaii, U.S.A.
One of the main sources for modern North American dialects and accents is the Atlas of North American English compiled under Labov at the University of Pennsylvania. It's based on organized telephone surveys across America looking for specific features known to be in the process of change, such as the wh/w merger.
See their home page, and for this particular sound change see their map 8. Every feature I've ever seen on these dialects map is scattered right across the US, since it's such a mobile population and entrenched dialects haven't had time to develop in much of it; but the map shows the geographical clustering of the distinction. Even in the South it looks like less than half the respondents make it. Nationwide, only 71 out of 587 respondents did.
I pronounce "whores" (not that the topic comes up all that often) as "hor" with a Z sound at the end as in "horz."
The "hor" in "horse" is indentical but with a hard S at the end as in "horss."
The "oar" in "hoarse" leans ever so slightly towards an "uh" sound making "hoarse" a bit higher in pitch than "horse."
I've asked around and have yet to find another American making this distinction and all these years have thought I had picked it up from the British. Picture Arthur Treacher, in full butler garb, saying "horse" with that bit of distain in his voice and you'll get somewhat an inkling of what I'm talking about.
To be honest though, when I say them both three times in succession, the difference totally evaporates. In other words, a "horse" is a "hoarse" of course, of course.
(Another way to tell them apart is that neither one rhymes with "zebra" but let's not go there again!)
quote:Originally posted by C J Strolin: I pronounce "whores" (not that the topic comes up all that often) as "hor" with a Z sound at the end as in "horz."
The "hor" in "horse" is indentical but with a hard S at the end as in "horss."
The "oar" in "hoarse" leans ever so slightly towards an "uh" sound making "hoarse" a bit higher in pitch than "horse."
This reminds me of the pronunciation of Houghton-le-Spring near Sunderland in North-East England. My wife once had it explained by a local. The Houghton bit is neither Howton or Horton, but something inbetween with a bit of a w sound. The le bit is pronounced lee, but you also seemed to have to get the rhythm right, so it is more like Houghtonly Spring than Houghton Leespring, but not actually either. We could cope with Spring.
quote:Those who pronounce "where" and "wear" the same are a distinct minority.
I am in the "distinct minority" then, and here I live "around Chicago!" Now, I could put on a few airs and say, "Oh, of course, "where" is completely different from "wear," but whom would I be kidding?
My ear is that if you hear someone without a British accent pronounce "wh" differently from "w", he's almost certainly from the Boston area. I'd think that almost no one else in the US does so.
CJ? Well, CJ is the exception to every general rule, so why should this one be different?
Not necessarily. I was born and raised in Connecticut and then, at age 19, moved to New Hampshire for another 3 years or so. The "wh" sound in "whale" seems to be a New England thing.
Judging from reactions of Americans from other parts of the country when I pronounce the H this way, it would seem like a Martian thing but that's another matter.
I had honestly never ever considered that whales could possibly be pronounced differently to Wales, and I am still not sure how you make the sound. Do you make a h sound first, before the w? In my dictionary, this is how the sound is represented.
Graham, I am not sure either. However, my concept is that in "whales" there is a longer blowing sound with the "w." Yet, "Wales" is pronounced with a simple "w." I don't think it is pronounced like "hwales," but I truly don't know. I would just love to hear CJ say them both, too. Maybe it is clearer to his own ear than to those to whom he is talking?
[This message was edited by Kalleh on Fri Jan 30th, 2004 at 21:41.]
More effected speakers in the UK might use this difference in prouncunciation but it is rare and certainly not important.
I hae refrained from commenting on this topic until now since it is ulimately inacpalble of resolution. Accents vary so muc that there will inevitably be differences which seem strange or even pointless.
I prefer to concentrate on the meanings of words rather than the way we say them.
For example, on the Opinionated Beer Pages I have just read the following, "...i don't see how you can diss the natty light guys, it gets plenty of college students good and drunk night after night, along with the oodles and noodles for every meal, but it still does the job..." And "...i chose natural light over any beer not just because of the price..."
I assume this is something to do with beer but I am unsure what. So, US English speakers, can you offer me a translation?
Richard English
Posts: 8038 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UK
quote:Originally posted by Graham Nice: I had honestly never ever considered that whales could possibly be pronounced differently to Wales, and I am still not sure how you make the sound. Do you make a h sound first, before the w? In my dictionary, this is how the sound is represented.
I't's easy enough to demonstrate.
The aspirate "h" sound is unusual in that by itself it can be formed with the mouth in almost any position. It doesn't require, as the other sounds do, a particular positioning of lips, tongue or teeth. Try it with your mouth in different positions and you'll see. So it can actually be formed simultaneously with any of the other (usually non-aspirated) sounds except for the plosives which start with the mouth blocked and so prevent the aspiration). We normally only use it with vowels but if you actually examine what you are doing in pronouncing (for example) my surname <Hale> you will discover that the H is not being formed as a separate sound it is being formed simultaneously with the a.
This is just as easy to do with a consonant (except the plosives) but because it's much rarer feels and sounds a bit odd.
So the people who choose to pronounce the "h" in whales (and I agree with RE's comments about this) actually form the two sounds together.
Just try breathing out hard at the same time as saying Wales.
quote:Originally posted by Richard English: I prefer to concentrate on the meanings of words rather than the way we say them. Quite agree, quite agree! (Spoken in the same voice as Monthy Python's Graham Chapman doing his "Colonel" character)
For example, on the Opinionated Beer Pages I have just read the following, "...i don't see how you can diss "diss" = "to show disrespect" To diss a Rolls-Royce, for example, would be to compare it unfavorably to a Ford Pinto. the natty light guys Persons favoring Natural Light, a brand of beer, it gets plenty of college students good and drunk night after night, along with the oodles and noodles Brand name of one of those put-into-boiling-water-for-3-minutes-&-eat ramen noodle snack foods, a big favorite with the college crowd. Filling, not particularly nutritious, easy to prepare. ("Top Ramen" is infinitely superior but if you're drinking Natural Light, you're probably not the most demanding of consumers.) for every meal, but it still does the job..." And "...i chose natural light over any beer not just because of the price..." Natural Light, as you undoubtedly have guessed, is not the priciest of brews. On a similar note, a blind taste test of American beers a while ago showed Milwaukee Light to be the winner. Budweiser fans were appalled and anyone who ever sipped a non-American beer in his or her life completely ignored the poll.
I assume this is something to do with beer but I am unsure what. So, US English speakers, can you offer me a translation?
quote:I prefer to concentrate on the meanings of words rather than the way we say them.
I enjoy both. For example, I think the thread on the number of syllables in "fire" was fun and quite stimulating, though it was long and it diverted a bit!
I agree with CJ about the meaning that thread posted by that illiterate poster on the Opinionated Beer board. It is very sad to see that sort of writing. What has happened to our educational system?
Neat-o 
