Pronunciations you had to unlearn

[Kuchigakatai]

lúnatic is stressed on the -u-, /ˈlunətɪk/. I had been pronouncing it "/luˈnætɪk/".

[Ashtagon]

Until very recently, I could have sworn that the "a" in "ate" was a diphthong.

How did you think the diphthong was pronounced? In American English, diphthongal /eɪt/ is the standard pronunciation; in British English, it's interchangeable with monophthongal /ɛt/.

British here. I always thought /ɛt/ was standard American and certain rural dialects of British.

[LingEarth]

Northeast U.S., and I always say /eɪt/. I associate the /ɛt/ pronunciation with... I don't even know what particular dialects, more just a general feeling that it's an "unsophisticated" pronunciation. I definitely wouldn't have thought of it as British.

Wiktionary has several examples of authors spelling it "et" in certain characters' speech.

[Travis B.]

I (a Wisconsinite) have /eɪt/ for ate but phonetically (in isolation) [e̞ʔ]* or, more carefully, [e̞ʔt]*, as my /eɪ/ is normally [e̞]. I have never heard /ɛt/, which to me would be [ɜʔ~ɜʔt], with any realization, for ate myself in Real Life, even though I was aware of some British people having it.

* This might be what some are hearing as /ɛt/.

[Linguoboy]

British here. I always thought /ɛt/ was standard American and certain rural dialects of British.

LOL. Here it's associated with rural dialects as well. Mark Twain uses the dialect spelling "et" for some of his characters but I used to live near Hannibal and I don't recall anyone there talking this way. Additionally I've also seen this used to render foreign pronunciations of English (e.g. a broad variety of Yinglish).

[Richard W]

Until very recently, I could have sworn that the "a" in "ate" was a diphthong.

How did you think the diphthong was pronounced? In American English, diphthongal /eɪt/ is the standard pronunciation; in British English, it's interchangeable with monophthongal /ɛt/.

British here. I always thought /ɛt/ was standard American and certain rural dialects of British.

Such is the confusion caused by eye dialect.

[Linguoboy]

Such is the confusion caused by eye dialect.

I'm not sure where "eye dialect" comes into the picture. When Twain or Tolkien write "et", it's to indicate the pronunciation /ˈɛt/ as opposed to the pronunciation /ˈeːt/ which would be implied by "ate". These would only be examples of "eye dialect" if /ˈɛt/ were, in fact, the standard pronunciation.

[Richard W]

Such is the confusion caused by eye dialect.

I'm not sure where "eye dialect" comes into the picture. When Twain or Tolkien write "et", it's to indicate the pronunciation /ˈɛt/ as opposed to the pronunciation /ˈeːt/ which would be implied by "ate". These would only be examples of "eye dialect" if /ˈɛt/ were, in fact, the standard pronunciation.

Indeed, only if 2 + 2 = 4. /ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[Linguoboy]

/ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

[Richard W]

/ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

The Old English preterite is <æt>, which can yield /et/, but not /eɪt/. Onions' Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology says, "The sp. ate of the pt. depends on early ME at, which repr. a short var. of OE ǣt; the pronunc. et is usu. assoc with the sp. ate, but is perh. a shortening of pt. ēt." The pronunciation of the preterite is given as "et, eɪt".

[Travis B.]

/ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

The Old English preterite is <æt>, which can yield /et/, but not /eɪt/. Onions' Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology says, "The sp. ate of the pt. depends on early ME at, which repr. a short var. of OE ǣt; the pronunc. et is usu. assoc with the sp. ate, but is perh. a shortening of pt. ēt." The pronunciation of the preterite is given as "et, eɪt".

The fact of the matter though is despite what one can dig up about etymology, /eɪt/ (whether you pronounce it with an actual diphthong or with a mid or close-mid monophthong, and regardless of whether you actually pronounce it long or not) is the standard pronunciation of ate in all English varieties today.

[Linguoboy]

/ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

The Old English preterite is <æt>, which can yield /et/, but not /eɪt/.

It's a good thing Old English etyma never yield something they aren't supposed to in the development of English.

[Travis B.]

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

The Old English preterite is <æt>, which can yield /et/, but not /eɪt/.

It's a good thing Old English etyma never yield something they aren't supposed to in the development of English.

This is like claiming that one ought to pronounce Tuesday as /ˈtjuːzdɪ/ and everything else is a horrible spelling pronunciation that one should be ashamed of.

[Kuchigakatai]

/ˈɛt/ is the standard pronunciation.

[citation desperately needed]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

Here's a citation: John C. Wells's Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (2000), "ate" at page 51, says:

ate past of eat et eɪt || eɪt <!>et —BrE 1988 poll panel preference: et 55%, eɪt 45%. In AmE, however, et is considered non-standard.

It seems that [ɛt] was the slightly preferred standard pronunciation in Britain at least back in 1988. And the notation of the dictionary indicates a remaining preference for [ɛt] still by 2000: the double vertical bars indicate British usage on the left and American usage on the right, and the blue colour indicates the "main" pronunciation, whereas any following pronunciation in black is an "alternative" pronunciation.

(The <!> thing is how I'm rendering the triangle with an exclamation mark inside in the original. It indicates "et" is an alternative pronunciation in the US, but is "considered incorrect".)

I can perfectly believe /eɪt/ is more common in Britain today btw. Not that I actually know how Brits speak anyway. I've barely been exposed to those dialects, ever.

[Raphael]

I was mainly exposed to the non-diphthong version by watching excerpts of British tv shows on Youtube.

[Linguoboy]

All the sources I have to hand (OED, AHD, Wiktionary, etc.) give /ˈeːt/ as the chief pronunciation for all varieties of English and list /ˈɛt/ as--at best--an alternative in some. Maybe it's "standard" only for UK nonagenarians?

Here's a citation: John C. Wells's Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (2000), "ate" at page 51, says:

ate past of eat et eɪt || eɪt <!>et —BrE 1988 poll panel preference: et 55%, eɪt 45%. In AmE, however, et is considered non-standard.

It seems that [ɛt] was the slightly preferred standard pronunciation in Britain at least back in 1988. And the notation of the dictionary indicates a remaining preference for [ɛt] still by 2000: the double vertical bars indicate British usage on the left and American usage on the right, and the blue colour indicates the "main" pronunciation, whereas any following pronunciation in black is an "alternative" pronunciation.

Cheers, Kuchigakatai. Seems like my snarky remark about British nonagenarians wasn't too far off the mark.

[Richard W]

/eɪt/ is as bad as /iːðə/ for either, though the correct answer to 'Is it /aɪðə/ or /iːðə/?' is '/aɪðə/'.

[Travis B.]

/eɪt/ is as bad as /iːðə/ for either, though the correct answer to 'Is it /aɪðə/ or /iːðə/?' is '/aɪðə/'.

I.e. not bad at all, if anything better.

[Linguoboy]

/eɪt/ is as bad as /iːðə/ for either, though the correct answer to 'Is it /aɪðə/ or /iːðə/?' is '/aɪðə/'.

Etymologically, shouldn't it be /ˈeɪðə/?

[Travis B.]

/eɪt/ is as bad as /iːðə/ for either, though the correct answer to 'Is it /aɪðə/ or /iːðə/?' is '/aɪðə/'.

Etymologically, shouldn't it be /ˈeɪðə/?

Etymology 'ought' does not make.