|
|
spelling change vs pronunciation change
What do you suppose would be a better option for words which are spelled nothing like they are pronounced:
1. Change the spelling (cognac => konyak) 2. Change the pronunciation (cognac pronounced kog-nack) For the sake of argument, there is no option to leave things as they are.
This is a no-brainer in my opinion: change the spelling
What would be wrong with "coniac"
Although I'm fine with the situation as it is, if faced with only those two choices, I'd definitely go with changing the spelling. There's ample precedent for doing that in German, for example, where they've started nativizing the spellings of a lot of French words. To change the pronunciation strikes me as quite absurd.
Of course only the Southwestern American pronunciations are correct. Therefore the spelling must reflect this. All other dialects are wrong. Although I wouldn't be too opposed to having all native English speakers learn to speak like we do.
Of the two options, I'd rather change the spelling. How about "conyac"?
But it is pronounced 'cognac' in the language where it's taken from. And why worry about foreign words that have come into English? Surely we should worry about the ridiculous spelling rules of the native words before the logical ones of stolen foreign ones?
Well in French it's pronoucned [kɔˈɲak], roughly equivalent to English "con-yack".
<<But it is pronounced 'cognac' in the language where it's taken from.>>
But that doesn't really matter. Why would people know how to pronounce it because it's French? Hardly anyone knows French these days, so people are bound to screw it up all the time. Loan words from French seem to be more preserved (and yet screwed up more than any) which is just weird considering we're speaking English... I think there will come a time when young people will know no French whatsoever and it will be necessary to Anglicise the words simply because it would be too embarrassing not to.
«Lazar Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:06 am GMT
Although I'm fine with the situation as it is, if faced with only those two choices, I'd definitely go with changing the spelling. There's ample precedent for doing that in German, for example, where they've started nativizing the spellings of a lot of French words. To change the pronunciation strikes me as quite absurd. » Yeah, and here in the Netherlands they did it the other way around unfortunately. Formerly you could choose yourself whether you wrote the Dutch or French way, now only the French way is allowed. Cadeau - Kado Bureau - Buro That kind of words.. I think it would be better if we used kado and buro as they're more native to us. Changing the spelling should be the solution, not changing the pronunciation.
Lazar : « Well in French it's pronoucned [kɔˈɲak], roughly equivalent to English "con-yack". »
Tu trouves plusieurs prononciations en français : [ko·njak], [ko·ɲak], [kɔ·njak], [kɔ·ɲak], [kə·ɲak] etc. Mais /ko·ɲak/ & /kɔ·ɲak/ sont les deux phonématismes les plus répandus.
"For the sake of argument, there is no option to leave things as they are."
Why not? |