Page 114 of 138
Re: English questions
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2025 4:37 pm
by Richard W
Lērisama wrote: ↑Mon Oct 27, 2025 12:59 pm
Interestingly, I'd have to say “apologise the Holocaust” rather than “apologise
for the Holocaust” to intend that meaning.
Not a construction known to
Wiktionary, which has the verb as intransitive in all uses.
Re: English questions
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2025 8:25 pm
by Travis B.
bradrn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 27, 2025 1:12 pm
Lērisama wrote: ↑Mon Oct 27, 2025 12:59 pm
Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 27, 2025 12:47 pm
Which is a meaning of 'apologize' in English, if a somewhat formal, literary meaning.
Interestingly, I'd have to say “apologise the Holocaust” rather than “apologise
for the Holocaust” to intend that meaning.
I did notice that too.
That syntax does not work for me ─
apologize requires the preposition
for when it takes a non-dative argument other than the subject for me.
Re: English questions
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:29 pm
by alice
"apologize" may be one of those rare verbs which can't take a direct object, unless you can apologize an apology.
Re: English questions
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:48 pm
by zompist
alice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:29 pm
"apologize" may be one of those rare verbs which can't take a direct object, unless you can apologize an apology.
We have a term for that one— "cognate object." You could argue that it's a syntactic process and not a "real transitive". It's certainly not a prototypical one.
Maybe a prototypical instransitive is "die", and yet people can "die a slow death" etc.
Re: English questions
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2025 4:05 pm
by Raphael
Well, when all is said and done, if I see a report saying that someone "apologized for X", I'll assume that this means that the person said "I'm sorry for X". If, as in this case, what basically happened is that the person said "There was nothing wrong with X", then that strikes me as the opposite of that.
Re: English questions
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2025 5:50 pm
by zompist
Merriam-Webster tells us
The earliest uses of apologize more often meant “to offer an excuse or defense” than “to acknowledge a fault.”
I'd find that sense confusing— normally we'd just say "defend". But
apologetics and
apologist still have the old meaning.
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:52 am
by Raphael
Different topic: OK, I admit it, I sometimes talk to myself. I'm weird that way. What's weirder: I sometimes talk to myself in English. Now, recently I've noticed that my pronunciation is usually reasonably good when I do that - except when there's a word with an intervocalic "r". Then, I tend to sort of swallow the r, and even, to some extent, merge the vowel before and the vowel after it.
Any ideas on why that might be?
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 5:35 am
by bradrn
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:52 am
Different topic: OK, I admit it, I sometimes talk to myself. I'm weird that way. What's weirder: I sometimes talk to myself in English. Now, recently I've noticed that my pronunciation is usually reasonably good when I do that -
except when there's a word with an intervocalic "r".
Then, I tend to sort of swallow the r, and even, to some extent, merge the vowel before and the vowel after it.
Any ideas on why that might be?
Example please?
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 7:35 am
by Raphael
Wait a moment, I need to have the place to myself so that I can try to record something in peace.
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:14 am
by Travis B.
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:52 am
Different topic: OK, I admit it, I sometimes talk to myself. I'm weird that way. What's weirder: I sometimes talk to myself in English. Now, recently I've noticed that my pronunciation is usually reasonably good when I do that -
except when there's a word with an intervocalic "r".
Then, I tend to sort of swallow the r, and even, to some extent, merge the vowel before and the vowel after it.
Any ideas on why that might be?
That's interesting, because, outside of initial environments, intervocalic environments are where /r/ is
best preserved in most English varieties. (Hell, non-rhotic English varieties, aside from some non-rhotic NAE varieties,
add 'r's in hiatus environments...)
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:32 am
by Lērisama
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:52 am
Different topic: OK, I admit it, I sometimes talk to myself. I'm weird that way. What's weirder: I sometimes talk to myself in English. Now, recently I've noticed that my pronunciation is usually reasonably good when I do that -
except when there's a word with an intervocalic "r".
Then, I tend to sort of swallow the r, and even, to some extent, merge the vowel before and the vowel after it.
Any ideas on why that might be?
If you're describing what I think you're describing, I've think I've heard this from another native German speaker fluent in English. Isn't it pretty similar to how an intervocallic ⟨r⟩ is sometimes pronounced in German?
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:37 am
by Raphael
Lērisama wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:32 am
Isn't it pretty similar to how an intervocallic ⟨r⟩ is sometimes pronounced in German?
Not that I'd ever have noticed, to be honest.
******
OK, try to see if you can hear it in the word "horrible" at the end of this recording (inside a zip file to make the board software happy):
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:50 am
by Travis B.
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:37 am
OK, try to see if you can hear it in the word "horrible" at the end of this recording (inside a zip file to make the board software happy):
The /r/ in "horrible" sounds 'weaker', but it is still definitely there; it sounds like a coronal /r/ to me, which I naturally perceive as 'weaker' than my native uvular/pharyngeal (initially also labialized, post-coronally postalveolar/uvular) /r/.
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:52 am
by bradrn
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:37 am
OK, try to see if you can hear it in the word "horrible" at the end of this recording (inside a zip file to make the board software happy):
I can hear it, I think. Also in the previous word ‘really’ it sounds like a [w] to me (something which, admittedly, I also do on occasion).
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 9:02 am
by Travis B.
bradrn wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:52 am
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:37 am
OK, try to see if you can hear it in the word "horrible" at the end of this recording (inside a zip file to make the board software happy):
I can hear it, I think. Also in the previous word ‘really’ it sounds like a [w] to me (something which, admittedly, I also do on occasion).
A labialized initial /r/ is typical of most English varieties today. Some, but not all, English varieties labialize /r/ in other environments as well.
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 3:17 pm
by alice
zompist wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:48 pm
alice wrote: ↑Tue Oct 28, 2025 3:29 pm
"apologize" may be one of those rare verbs which can't take a direct object, unless you can apologize an apology.
We have a term for that one— "cognate object." You could argue that it's a syntactic process and not a "real transitive". It's certainly not a prototypical one.
Maybe a prototypical instransitive is "die", and yet people can "die a slow death" etc.
For some reason this immediately put me in mind of Scala's "companion objects". There might be something in there.
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 4:10 pm
by Raphael
Thank you for your feedback, everyone!
Re: English questions
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2025 4:30 pm
by Travis B.
Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 9:02 am
bradrn wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:52 am
Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:37 am
OK, try to see if you can hear it in the word "horrible" at the end of this recording (inside a zip file to make the board software happy):
I can hear it, I think. Also in the previous word ‘really’ it sounds like a [w] to me (something which, admittedly, I also do on occasion).
A labialized initial /r/ is typical of most English varieties today. Some, but not all, English varieties labialize /r/ in other environments as well.
I should also note that there are varieties of English in which [ʋ] is a typical realization of /r/.
Re: English questions
Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2025 1:24 am
by jcb
Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 4:30 pm
Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 9:02 am
bradrn wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:52 am
I can hear it, I think. Also in the previous word ‘really’ it sounds like a [w] to me (something which, admittedly, I also do on occasion).
A labialized initial /r/ is typical of most English varieties today. Some, but not all, English varieties labialize /r/ in other environments as well.
I should also note that there are varieties of English in which [ʋ] is a typical realization of /r/.
Also note that sometimes English /r/ is pronounced as [w] (or something close to that) by children who haven't mastered [r\`] yet. I myself wasn't able to properly pronounce American English /r/ until I was 11 years old and had 3 years of speech therapy at school.
Re: English questions
Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2025 9:25 am
by Travis B.
jcb wrote: ↑Thu Oct 30, 2025 1:24 am
Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 4:30 pm
Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 9:02 am
A labialized initial /r/ is typical of most English varieties today. Some, but not all, English varieties labialize /r/ in other environments as well.
I should also note that there are varieties of English in which [ʋ] is a typical realization of /r/.
Also note that sometimes English /r/ is pronounced as [w] (or something close to that) by children who haven't mastered [r\`] yet. I myself wasn't able to properly pronounce American English /r/ until I was 11 years old and had 3 years of speech therapy at school.
I
still haven't mastered [ɻ] and I'm middle-aged now -- I can only reliably pronounce it after another coronal (in my native speech I coarticulate it with a uvular POA, even though I can force myself to turn off the uvular coarticulation, though) -- but [w] is closer to (but not exactly) how I pronounce /l/ in certain environments...