Pronunciation of Standard English in America (1919)

[Travis B.]

I am used to [sətˈtʃɜsʲtʲ] for suggest, and find the version with [g]~[k] to be a spelling pronunciation.

Geminate affricate?

Yep.

[Emily]

ʃ

• [ʃ] is occasionally heard for [s] in words like assume, sumach, "especially in dialect speech"
• schnapps is [ʃnæps]
• chassis is [ʃæˈsiː], chiffon is [ˈʃɪfɔn], mustache is [məˈstæʃ]
• not a pronunciation question but when he distinguishes between different uses of the word "chamois" he defines one meaning as "the name of the skin of commerce", which i love)
• he lists both [ʃɪˈkɑːgo] and [ʃɪˈkɔːgo] for Chicago; i need an easterner to tell me which one is usual in modern times
• chivalry is sometimes pronounced with [tʃ] instead of [ʃ] in england, though not in the US
• parochial is occasionally pronounced [pəˈroːʃəl]
• words where [-ʃɪ-] and [-sɪ-] alternate include oceanic, enunciate, associate, pronunciation, officiate, emaciated; appreciation is described as going either way but appreciate only has [ʃ]. in general he says [ʃ] is more common, but [s] is often found in cultivated speech, "especially in formal discourse"; he also speculates that the [s] form is more common in words with -tion to avoid a repeated [ʃ] (a similar phenomenon is noted for differentiation, negotiation, substantiation). likewise, [s] is sometimes heard for sci, "especially in learned words" like omniscient, prescience
• Asia is standardly [ˈeːʃə] "but also" [ˈeːʒə]
• for transient he lists [ˈtrænʃənt] as the standard pronunciation, with [ˈtrænsɪənt] as a common formal pronunciation, and further adds that sometimes it is voiced to [ˈtrænʒənt]
• nausea and derivates are standardly [ˈnɔːʃə], but also [ˈnɔːʃɪə], [ˈnɔːsɪə], [ˈnɔːʒə], [ˈnɔːʒɪə], [ˈnɔːziə] — i have [ʒ] in "nausea", [ʃ] in "nauseous", and [zɪ] in "nauseating" lol
• [ʃu] for su/xu is found not just in sensual, sexual, luxury but also in insular, peninsula, consular; for all, however, he notes that [sju] also occurs, "especially in formal or conscious speech"
• similarly, words like issue, tissue, fissure, pressure generally have [ʃ] but sometimes have a "careful" pronunciation of [sj] or [ʃj]; he also notes that tissue also appears in the colloquial form [ˈtɪʃə]
• righteous is pronounced with a [tʃ], and courteous sometimes is as well, though more commonly with [tɪ]
• amateur is "quite generally in familiar speech" pronounced [ˈæmətʃɚɹ], but in cultivated speech is pronounced [æməˈtɚɹ]
• sentient is [ˈsɛnʃənt], but with [ˈsɛntɪənt] "as a learned word" — i hate "sen-tee-ent" so much and it pisses me off so bad that it's over 100 years old
• ratio is [ˈreːʃo], no indication of today's three syllables
• sti is generally pronounced [stʃ], as in question, suggestion, Christian; his explanation for the [t] is that it remains "to avoid the juxtaposition of [s] and [ʃ]" — i generally have [ʃtʃ] in these words
• he notes that [nʃ] may become [ntʃ] in words like mention, attention, convention when strongly stressed — the clusters [nʃ] and [ntʃ], and similarly [ns] and [nts], are more or less in free variation for me
• actual is [ˈæktʃuəl], no mention of a [-kʃ-] variant
• words like nature, feature, creature, moisture, furniture are generally pronounced with final [ɚɹ], but sometimes with [ʊɹ] in formal speech
• he describes the process of [tju] becoming [tʃu] as a historical process, saying it became [tʃu] in "generally accepted English" only by the close of the eighteenth century, and notes that [tju] can still be heard occasionally in formal speech; for words of three or four syllables "which may have a secondary stress on the final syllable" such as literature, the standard unstressed [tʃɚɹ] is sometimes replaced with [ˌtjʊɹ] in "formal and careful" speech
• "The pronunciation of u in the combination tu as [u], not [ju], resulted merely in a weakening of the vowel without any change in the character of the preceding consonant. Thus arose dialect pronunciations like critter for creature, nater, nateral for nature, natural, etc."
• tu remains [tju] when stressed and in monosyllables: mature, institute, institution, astute, tuber, tudor, tunic, tunor, tube, tune — i have [tu] for all of these, except for "mature" which is [məˈtʃɚ]

ʒ

• malinger is [məˈlɪndʒɚɹ], "though occasionally speakers are led to pronounce the word as though it were a variant form of linger [ˈlɪŋgɚɹ]"
• gibber and gibering gan be either [dʒɪ-] or [gɪ-], but gibberish is always [gɪ-]
• gymnasium is [dʒɪmˈneːʒəm], with [-zɪəm] called a "learned pronunciation"
• several words like hosier, glazier, usual, visual are listed as being pronounced with either [ʒ] or [ʒj], a distinction which i don't think i would be able to hear
• even as early as 1919 there is still variation between [ˈlɛʒɚɹ] and [ˈliːʒɚɹ] for leisure
• the di in medial, obedient, expedient, tedious, medium, radium, tedium is usually [dɪ], but occasionally [dʒ]
• equation is typically [-ʒən] but can also be [-ʃən]
• camouflage has final rather than initial accent

[foxcatdog]

For me there is no other way but Sen-tee-ent

[Emily]

For me there is no other way but Sen-tee-ent

[Man in Space]

I was today years old when I realized that for me, I think I approach* [-ʃɪ-] in “associate” the noun and [-sɪ-] in “associate” the verb (plus a reduced vowel in the ultima of the former whilst it’s full in the latter).

* I’m not 100% sure what is going on but I perceive some sort of nontrivial difference between the two parts of speech’s realizations. Maybe airflow shenanigans?

[Sol717]

sti is generally pronounced [stʃ], as in question, suggestion, Christian; his explanation for the [t] is that it remains "to avoid the juxtaposition of [s] and [ʃ]" — i generally have [ʃtʃ] in these words

This goes back to the Old French pronunciation of Latin learnedisms adopted into Middle English, where Latin -STI- was pronounced /sti/, but elsewhere -TI- was /si/; compare ME questioun /kwɛstiˈuːn/ with nacioun /naːsiˈuːn/, noting the distinction helpfully maintained in the spelling (though Latinising spellings like natioun are attested in ME, especially later on). Already in ME these /sti si/ were commonly pronounced /stj sj/, though Shakespeare still has the older forms; from late ME onwards a further development to /st͡ʃ ʃ/ is found, eventually displacing the older forms entirely in what are by now unstressed syllables.

[Travis B.]

I was today years old when I realized that for me, I think I approach* [-ʃɪ-] in “associate” the noun and [-sɪ-] in “associate” the verb (plus a reduced vowel in the ultima of the former whilst it’s full in the latter).

* I’m not 100% sure what is going on but I perceive some sort of nontrivial difference between the two parts of speech’s realizations. Maybe airflow shenanigans?

In associate (n.) I have -[ʃiːɘʔ(t)]~[ʃjɘʔ(t)]~[ʃɘʔ(t)] (but in the latter case I find it a bit odd to pronounce the [t]) while in associate (v.) I have -[ʃiːˌe̞ʔ(t)]~[ˌʃje̞ʔ(t)]. I find it quite odd to have [ɪ] in these words.

[Travis B.]

On that note, I assume that I'm not odd in having a very tenuous unstressed /i/ in many unstressed C_V positions that in careful speech is pronounced as a full vowel but which readily becomes [j] or even disappears in everyday speech. (I also have a tenuous unstressed /u/ in some unstressed C_V such as in mutual that in careful speech is pronounced as a full vowel but readily becomes [w] in everyday speech.)

[Sol717]

. (I also have a tenuous unstressed /u/ in some unstressed C_V such as in mutual that in careful speech is pronounced as a full vowel but readily becomes [w] in everyday speech.)

That's not unusual in words with -ual; in fact, some speakers can have no /w/ at all, making -ual and -ial homophones. For instance I have e.g.mutual, mutually /ˈmjʉːt͡ʃu, ˈmjʉːt͡ʃ(ɘ)li/, with no possible /w/. In other words with unstressed /u/ (I write <ʉ> for my speech to maintain a distinction from the product of l-vocalisation), I'd say there's more of a tendency towards unreduced forms; e.g. tenuous /ˈtenjʉːɘs~ˈtenjɘs~ˈtenwɘs/, occasionally /ˈtenjɘwɘs/.

[Travis B.]

. (I also have a tenuous unstressed /u/ in some unstressed C_V such as in mutual that in careful speech is pronounced as a full vowel but readily becomes [w] in everyday speech.)

That's not unusual in words with -ual; in fact, some speakers can have no /w/ at all, making -ual and -ial homophones. For instance I have e.g.mutual mutually /ˈmjʉːt͡ʃu, ˈmjʉːt͡ʃ(ɘ)li/, with no possible /w/. In other words with unstressed /u/ (I write <ʉ> for my speech to maintain a distinction from the product of l-vocalisation), I'd say there's more of a tendency towards unreduced forms; e.g. tenuous /ˈtenjʉːɘs~ˈtenjɘs~ˈtenwɘs/, occasionally /ˈtenjɘwɘs/.

I normally don't have a [w] in -ually (mutually, actually) but I generally have [w] in -ual (mutual, actual).

[Emily]

t

• trait has a silent final t in british english
• for some reason he describes the spelling of -ction for [kʃən] as having a silent t
• -ctu- can be either [kʃ] or [ktʃ] in words like actual, juncture, puncture, lecture, manufacture, but the [t] form is preferred "in formal and careful speech"; forms without [t] in exhaustion, question, fixture, mixture are "slovenly"
• the t is silent in soften, often, moisten, chestnut, though sometimes often has a [t] as a spelling pronunciation
• he describes the same variations in [ntʃ] ~ [nʃ], [ltʃ] ~ [lʃ], [nts] ~ [ns] that are mentioned in earlier combinations like [n(d)ʒ]; the forms with [t] are to be preferred, although he notes that some speakers do make distinctions between [nts] and [ns] specifically — i am basically incapable of hearing a distinction at all
• [t] is often omitted after [p] "in the popular dialects": slept [slɛp], kept [kɛp], etc.
• [t] is sometimes added in popular speech to words that don't normally have it, particularly after [s]: once [wʌnst], twice [twaɪst], wish [wɪʃt], across [əˈkrɔst], close [kloːst], attack [əˈtækt]
• other words where final [t] is often left out include just, wrist, host, next, locust (he writes "In locust few cultivated speakers would acknowledge omitting the final consonant, yet in current speech it is doubtful if one ever hears it"), insect, contact, perfect, aqueduct
  • he transcribes the first vowel in aqueduct as [æ]

θ, ð

• though Esther is usually pronounced [t], a pronunciation with [θ] can occasionally be heard
• popular speech often has [fɪft], [sɪkst] for fifth, sixth
• intrusive [θ] in height was already widespread in 1919
• he lists with among a list of words with [ð], no mention of any variation or dialect differences
• rhythm and derivates like rhythmic most commonly have [ð] but sometimes [θ], with the derivates more likely to have [θ] than the main word
• the formal pronunciation of asthma is [ˈæzðmə], though [ˈæzmə] is also common; the british pronunciations are apparently [ˈæsθmə], [ˈæsmə], [ˈæstmə] — i just think of "sucks to your ass-mar" from lord of the flies
• the common deletion of [ð] in clothes also occurred in other words including oaths
• "in the popular dialects" [θ] and [ð] are sometimes completely replaced by [t] and [d]: think [tɪŋk], that [dæt] — i've heard [dæt] before, but never [tɪŋk], at least not from a u.s. native speaker
  • he also uses with as an example here with the transcription "[wɪt] or [wɪd]", so i guess there's the acknowledgement that there's variation

[vlad]

• he transcribes the first vowel in aqueduct as [æ]

[æ]quaman (1967)
[ɑ]quaman (1973) (also [sju]perman at one point)

[Ketsuban]

• trait has a silent final t in british english

...does it not in American?

• other words where final [t] is often left out include just, wrist, host, next, locust (he writes "In locust few cultivated speakers would acknowledge omitting the final consonant, yet in current speech it is doubtful if one ever hears it"), insect, contact, perfect, aqueduct

Also "the hostess with the mostes[t]". This feels almost like a sound change that got undone.

• the formal pronunciation of asthma is [ˈæzðmə], though [ˈæzmə] is also common; the british pronunciations are apparently [ˈæsθmə], [ˈæsmə], [ˈæstmə] — i just think of "sucks to your ass-mar" from lord of the flies

This unlocked memories of hearing [ˈæzmə] in American media. I guess I'd just... overwritten it in my head with the [ˈæsmə] I expected to hear, or thought maybe (because what I was watching was generally a little dated) it was an older pronunciation.

I've never watched an adaptation of Lord of the Flies, but "ass-mar" would have to be [ˈæsˈmɑː] for me.

• "in the popular dialects" [θ] and [ð] are sometimes completely replaced by [t] and [d]: think [tɪŋk], that [dæt] — i've heard [dæt] before, but never [tɪŋk], at least not from a u.s. native speaker

I think "popular" here might mean "AAVE". TH-stopping exists sporadically on this side of the pond too, most notably Irish English where the dental think [t̪ɪŋk] contrasts with the alveolar tink [tɪŋk].

[bradrn]

• he transcribes the first vowel in aqueduct as [æ]

[æ]quaman (1967)
[ɑ]quaman (1973) (also [sju]perman at one point)

I’ve always pronounced it with /æ/, but it’s probably a spelling pronunciation.

• trait has a silent final t in british english

...does it not in American?

I’m surprised that it does in any English dialect.

[vlad]

• he transcribes the first vowel in aqueduct as [æ]

[æ]quaman (1967)
[ɑ]quaman (1973) (also [sju]perman at one point)

I’ve always pronounced it with /æ/, but it’s probably a spelling pronunciation.

That's the standard pronunciation outside America.

[Ketsuban]

I completely misread the post and only just realised it. I thought the book was claiming it doesn't have a silent T in British English, so I was expressing surprise that Emily took the implication that in American English it does in stride.

[Travis B.]

• "in the popular dialects" [θ] and [ð] are sometimes completely replaced by [t] and [d]: think [tɪŋk], that [dæt] — i've heard [dæt] before, but never [tɪŋk], at least not from a u.s. native speaker

I think "popular" here might mean "AAVE". TH-stopping exists sporadically on this side of the pond too, most notably Irish English where the dental think [t̪ɪŋk] contrasts with the alveolar tink [tɪŋk].

TH-stopping exists basilectally in the dialect here (aside from AAVE). Note that it does not affect all TH - it is normally only initial (but my daughter has stopping of /ð/ medially in some words such as other when she does not elide it), and when /θ/ is stopped, which is less frequent in the first place, there is a dental/alveolar contrast (note that when /ð/ is stopped in somewhat less basilectal speech it is dentalveolar) and it is never aspirated. Also note that TH-stopping never occurs in some forms such as of the no matter the register; e.g. I normally pronounce of the as [əːðə(ː)].

[Emily]

i'm confused about what people are saying about "trait" and it sounds like others are too. the book says trait is pronounced /treːt/ in the u.s. and /treː ~ treɪ/ in the uk. i'm an american and in my entire time on god's green earth i have never once heard it pronounced without a final /t/

[bradrn]

i'm confused about what people are saying about "trait" and it sounds like others are too. the book says trait is pronounced /treːt/ in the u.s. and /treː ~ treɪ/ in the uk. i'm an american and in my entire time on god's green earth i have never once heard it pronounced without a final /t/

I’m not American and I agree. Perhaps this is a case where the British pronunciation has changed…

[bradrn]

Yep, Wiktionary agrees with my last suggestion: /tɹeɪ/ is ‘traditional British pronunciation, now virtually obsolete’.