Subway's Poor Portmanteau Choice

Am I the only one who has a problem with the name of Subway's new menu item?

There are just too many options for the phonetic realization of the neologism.

To start with, where are the syllable breaks? Is it fla/ti/za or flat/iz/a? Which syllable should be stressed? Also, if it is made to rhyme with pizza, it sounds like either fla/teets/a or flat/eets/a, depending on the syllable break.

I get that it is a portmanteau of flatbread + pizza. But it sure is a phonetically problematic portmanteau.

Banging a Left in Boston

Thankfully, I did not have to "bang a left" while visiting Boston this past week; I left all the driving to the expertise of the hacks (that way I didn't have to "pahk" a car either). I have no problem "hanging a left" or parking in Detroit but driving in Boston is a whole different animal. 

Did I mention the dialect?

Here are some examples of phonetic differences between Boston and other American dialects from Boston English:

Word	Boston	Standard American	Northern Cities
pack	[æ]	[æ]	[eæ]
cop			[a]
dawn
load	[o]	[ow]	[o]
food	[u]	[uw]	[u]

	Word	Boston	Standard American
Vowel lengthens, different quality	bar
	burr
/r/ replaced by schwa	bore
	beer
	bear

Here is A Dialect Map of American English

The Boston English site also includes details about phonology and The Wicked Good Guide to Boston English includes information about the Boston lexicon.

It was a wonderful trip, no Boston Coolers to be found though.

I'd Like a Syllable and an India Ale, Please

I'm not really in the mood for a Samuel Smith's, so...

make it a Wig Top IA.

As explained at Wikipedia - India Pale Ale or IPA is a beer style within the broader category of pale ale. It was first brewed in England in the 19th century. The first known use of "India pale ale" is an advertisement in the Liverpool Mercury in 1835. It was also referred to as "pale ale as prepared for India", "India Ale", "pale India ale" or "pale export India ale".

While IA may not be a common initialism for the beer style, I can't help but think about beer whenever I pass the above pictured store due to the familiarity of IPA as an initialism combined with the unusual bullet point insertions in the store's name and the recent influx of oddly named beers.

Yellowpages.com lists the store's name as Wigtopia Beauty Supply. Even without the addition of "beauty supply", when the bullet points are removed it is much more clear that the store name is meant to be verbalized as one word with syllable breaks like so: /wɪg.to.pi:ʌ/. This was also confirmed when I phoned the store and the clerk answered as such.

Perhaps the store owners designed the signage to be phonetically playful. Wigs do top the head and they probably do sell what they consider to be the ideal wigs, thus: /wɪg.tɑp.i:ʌ/.

Regardless, I can't do it; I will continue to read the store name as two words and an initialism: /wɪg tɑp aɪ eɪ/.

India Ale image here
Wig Top image from Yelp 

A Not So Trivial /ʌ/

He has been the host of a popular television game show since 1984 and is said to be contemplating retirement in the next two years.

Who is Alex Trebek?

Or should I say...Who is Alex Trebek-Ah?

I have been noticing more and more recently that when it comes to trivia games there seems to be a dialectical affectation exhibited by emcees.

I have been a Jeopardy viewer for as long as I can remember and it is only lately that I noticed Alex Trebek adding what I would call an "ah-suffix" to consonant final words when he is giving a question that was missed by the contestants. And it is not just Alex Trebek that does this (which might explain why I have noticed it more). My husband and I often play trivia at some local restaurants and have experienced several emcees that have the same affectation (e.g., "The correct answer is...game shows-Ah."). I have no idea if they are emulating Trebek or if it is part of their trivia training. Either way, it must be that the phenomenon is-Ah trending-Ah in the trivia world or I just wasn't as attentive prior to the last few months-Ah.

Phonetically, the sound could be transcribed as either /ʌ/ or /ɒ/ depending on the speaker's dialect. 

Image credits.

Wordplay in the Nick of Time

Cartoon by Chris Yoder.

Random Linguistics Definitions Beginning with the Letter "R"

rhotic A term used in English phonology referring to dialects or accents where /r/ is pronounced following a vowel, as in car and cart. Varieties which do not have this feature are non-rhotic (such as received pronunciation). Vowels which occur after retroflex consonants are sometimes called rhotacized (they display rhotacization).

right dislocation In grammatical description, a type of sentence in which one of the constituents appears in final position and its canonical position is filled by a pronoun with the same reference, e.g. I know her, Julie; He's always late, that chap.

rim The edges of the tongue, the extent of whose contact with the roof of the mouth can affect the quality of several sounds, such as [s] and [l].

Definitions from: A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, Sixth edition, 2008
Image credits: Wikipedia - Flag semaphore representation of letter 'R'

Illustrating the Production and Comprehension of Language

Two of my favorite language-related illustrations.

From the book Shapes for sounds by Timothy Donaldson, via brain pickings.

From an article in The Economist, illustration by W. Vasconcelos.

I think the illustrations complement each other quite nicely. My compliments to the artists.

complement

n.

1.

a. Something that completes, makes up a whole, or brings to perfection.
b. The quantity or number needed to make up a whole: shelves with a full complement of books.
c. Either of two parts that complete the whole or mutually complete each other.

compliment

n.

1. An expression of praise, admiration, or congratulation.

Update on Contraction Retraction

Back in January, I posted about a linguistic phenomenon that I observed and was unable to label. The original post titled "Contraction Retraction - A Phono-Morpho-Syntactic Phenomenon" can be found here.

Following are some relevant excerpts from the post:

What happens when a person starts to utter a contraction and then for some unknown reason decides to utter the two word phrase instead of the contraction?

If I start to say "don't" and change midway to "do not" what comes out of my mouth sounds an awful lot like "dough not".

Transcribed phonetically below.

don't = /dont/
do not = /du nat/
dough not = /do nat/

I decided to update the post because of a recently received reader comment:

It's called allomorphy (according to my linguistics professor). And it's not limited to contractions. It happens with a lot of words. What you're witnessing is the minor change in a word [do] as its instance is changed from "don't" to "do not".

Think about "photograph" versus "photography". [fo-tow-graph] versus [fo-tau-graf-ie]. The morpheme "photograph" has the same meaning, even in "photography", but because the pronunciation is different, it is a separate allomorph.

Here is my response:

Not to argue with your professor (and I am certainly no expert), but during my MA program in linguistics I never heard an analysis of contractions that presented the phonetic changes as allomorphy.

SIL International’s Glossary of Linguistic Terms defines an allomorph as one of two or more complementary morphs which manifest a morpheme in its different phonological or morphological environments.

With allomorphy, I have always understood the phonological and morphological environments to be limited to the words in which they appear.

To me, the phrase “do not” contains two separate free lexical morphemes and when they are contracted it is like combining the two lexical morphemes into one phonetic form.

Based on the broad phonetic transcriptions I presented, I would say there is deletion and assimilation through contraction but not a different form of one morpheme that would be considered allomorphy.

The most common type of allomorphy in English involves plural and past tense suffixes, for example; the past tense “–ed” suffix can be phonetically realized as /t/, /d/ or / əd/.

The example you have given comparing “photograph” /fotogræf/ to “photography” /fotɑgrɑfi/ is an example of root allomorphy (or stem allomorphy, depending on whom you ask) that is similar to “hymn” /him/ versus “hymnal” /himnəl/.

Regardless of whether or not the act of contracting is considered a form of allomorphy, I would still regard the phenomenon I have described as a different matter. As a matter of fact, upon further thought, I believe it involves more than just phonetics, phonology, morphology, and syntax; it also involves psycholinguistics. The phenomenon involves the process the brain is undergoing as it chooses initially to verbalize the contraction but switches midstream to an altered, un-contracted form of the initial phrase.

I now welcome more input and data from anyone who has experienced or witnessed this "contraction retraction" or has other thoughts about the processes involved.

The Past Tense of Text

What is the correct past tense form of the verb to text?

This question has come up quite a bit recently in conversations I have had with friends. Because I generally prefer to view language descriptively rather than prescriptively, I was thrilled to see David Crystal's response to the question on his DC Blog post titled "On texted vs texed".

Following are some excerpts from his post that provide a condensed answer to the question:


... when text became a verb again in the 1990s, in the modern sense, it followed the normal pattern, and texted is the form given in all the dictionaries. So the interesting question is, why has an alternative form developed. ...

... Pronunciation is probably part of the answer. ...

... adding an -ed ending alters the pronunciation dynamic. We now have two /t/ sounds in a rapid sequence, as we had in broadcasted, and that could motivate people to drop the ending. Speakers generally prefer shorter forms. ...

... Whatever the reasons, we do now find forms such as texed and tex'd being used with increasing frequency. I think it's only a matter of time before we find it being treated like broadcast in dictionaries, and given two forms.


In regards to the above mention of "two /t/ sounds in a rapid sequence", the past tense -ed suffix can be phonetically realized as /t/, /d/ or /Id/depending on the final sound of the root morpheme and depending on the speaker's dialect.

Compare the words walked, buzzed and rested.

For most people walked will end in /t/, buzzed will end in /d/ and rested will end in /Id/.

The only time the -ed suffix is vocalized as /Id/ is when the final sound of the root morpheme is a /t/ or /d/.

Returning to Crystal's mention that "speakers prefer shorter forms", I suppose a case could be made for two different analyses of the phonological shortening of the verb texted.

1. The root-final /t/ is omitted thus the -ed suffix is pronounced as /t/.
2. The -ed suffix, which is more commonly realized as /t/ than /Id/, is deleted.

Quite the phonological conundrum, isn't it?

I still say /tektId/.

Linguistics: Entertaining and Informative Mini-Lectures

I hope you enjoy these two mini-lectures with Professor Anne Curzan from the University of Michigan.

Part 1, The Word on Language and Grammar, talks about word formation, highlighting the "-ize" suffix and some of its odd results.

Part 2, The Word on Language and Grammar, gives an overview of the phonological phenomenon of metathesis, highlighting the asterisk/asteriks difference.


PART 1



PART 2


Both lectures are from the University of Michigan's LSA Wire.

Contraction Retraction - A Phono-Morpho-Syntactic Phenomenon

What happens when a person starts to utter a contraction and then for some unknown reason decides to utter the two word phrase instead of the contraction?
?
I have recently noticed a phenomenon that seems to play out in the phonetics, phonology, morphology, and syntax of certain contractions.

If I start to say "don't" and change midway to "do not" what comes out of my mouth sounds an awful lot like "dough not".

Transcribed phonetically below.

don't = /dont/
do not = /du nat/
dough not = /do nat/

The same phenomenon occurs with "won't" and "shan't".

won't = /wont/
will not = /wIl nat/
woe not = /wo nat/

shan't = /ʃænt/
shall not = /ʃɛl nat/
sh(y)eah not = /ʃæ nat/

I have been unable to locate an official name for this linguistic phenomenon so if anyone has further information please submit via comments below.

Also, comments are open for additional data (other contractions that are capable of undergoing this type of metamorphosis). Does this "contraction retraction" occur in other languages as well?

Image credits here.

This Baby is Missing a Letter

A good friend spotted this sign in a restroom at Disney World and snapped a photo to share with me. He commented that it amazed him how much the deletion of one letter from the beginning of a word can totally change the pronunciation of the word. I think the oddity of this example comes from the fact that when a string of consonants starts a word and one of the consonants is dropped the resulting word usually still rhymes (ex. "bloomed"..."loomed", "crusted"..."rusted", "strap"..."trap"..."rap", and so on).




That is not the case here, and part of the reason is that we are talking about consonant sounds, not letters. The word "changing" may start with two consonants in alphabetical spelling, however, phonetically, the letters "c" and "h" combine to form one sound - /ʧ/(aka /č/).


So, phonetically, we have "hanging" /hæŋəŋ/ compared to "changing" /ʧenʤəŋ/.


By adding the letter "c" to the "h" in the word "hanging", the word initial sound changes from a fricative to an affricate. Because sounds like to hang out with other sounds with whom they share commonalities, it is not surprising to see the affricate /ʤ/ in the word "changing". It also does not surprise me that the /æ/, which is a lax vowel, becomes /e/ (a tense vowel) in "changing" because if consonants were classified by tenseness, I would think that affricates are more tense than fricatives.

Morphophonology Rules (Actually, I Prefer Syntax and Semantics)

Following is a reader's comment on a recent post about paraprosdokians.

I've always loved gags like this -- "I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my father, not screaming and terrified like his passengers." — Bob Monkhouse



I never knew they had a name, so I did a Google search to find the proper pronunciation. Forvo.com says it's pronounced "para pros DOK ian," which is what I expected to find. However, the droll Brit at howjsay.com seems to have added a vowel where none exists in the spelling: "PARA pros(o) dokian."Is that an example of metathesis ?



And here is my response:

That would actually be an example of the morphophonological rule of insertion. Insertion is when a sound is inserted between two morphemes either for ease of articulation (to make the word easier to pronounce), or for ease of perception (to make it easier to hear every sound in a word), or both. British English speakers must not like having the morpheme /pras/ followed by the morpheme /dok/. I would guess that they insert the /o/ more for ease of perception than ease of articulation because the /s/ is in a syllable coda (end of the syllable) and the following /d/ is in a syllable onset (start of the syllable). Because the sounds in question are in two separate syllables, pronunciation should not be an issue. Are there any British English speakers who care to comment? I would love to hear from you.



I thought I would reprint this comment exchange because I always enjoy it when a post of mine piques a reader's curiosity and because I truly would love to hear what other readers think.

The First in a Series of Occasional Linguistics Quizzes

The fact that native Spanish speakers have difficulty pronouncing the English word "skate" indicates that English and Spanish______

a. are prescriptive languages.
b. have different phonotactic constraints.
c. are nearly impossible to learn.
d. are not rule governed.

For answer click here.

The First in a Series of Occasional Linguistics Quizzes - Answer

The correct answer to the First in a Series of Occasional Linguistics Quizzes is b.

English and Spanish have different phonotactic constraints.

While the /sk/ consonant cluster is perfectly acceptable to English speakers and is not usually even given a second thought, the cluster is not a psychological reality to Spanish speakers. Because Spanish speakers do not recognize the cluster, their phonotactic constraints do not allow the /sk/ cluster to appear in the same syllable. The result is Spanish speakers will insert the vowel /e/ before the cluster which forms another syllable and breaks apart the /sk/cluster.

English
/sket/

Spanish
/es ket/

Happy Homophonic Birthday Mom

Mom - You are the greatest and thank you for putting up with the utter chaos I caused at times. Hope you have an utterly outstanding day. I love you.

P.S. "Udder" and "utter" are only homophones on the surface level.

Phonemic Level---------------------Allophonic Level

(underlying transcription)---------- (surface translation)

udder

/ʌdɚ/----------------------------------[ʌDɚ]

utter

/ʌtɚ/-----------------------------------[ʌDɚ]

The American English phonology rule for flapping states that alveolar stops are flapped intervocalically when followed by an unstressed vowel.

Linguistics Cartoon Favorites - Nasal Twang

Newsweek Magazine's Weird Word Choice

The September 21st issue of Newsweek magazine includes an article titled "Born to be Big". Following is the opening sentence of the article:

"It's easy enough to find culprits in the nation's epidemic of obesity, starting with tubs of buttered popcorn at the multiplex and McDonald's 1,220-calorie deluxe breakfasts, and moving on to the couch potato-fication of America."

I am wondering if any particular word in this sentence bothers readers as much as it bothers me.

Do you see which word I am referring to?

Not yet.

Well.....

The word that really gets to me is "couch potato-fication".

A morphological analysis of the formation of the word "couch potato-fication" suggests that the suffix "-ify" (in the form of "-fy") was added to the compound noun "couch potato" resulting in the verb "couch potato-fy" meaning, "to make or cause one to be a couch potato." Then the suffix "-ation" was added to the verb "couch potato-fy" resulting in the noun "couch potato-fication" meaning, "the state or quality of making or causing one to be a couch potato."

While "-fy" is an accepted variant of the suffix "-ify", according to encyclopedia.com the suffix normally takes the form "-ify". Additionally, the combination of the suffixes "-ify" and "-ation" form what is considered a separate suffix "-ification". The suffix "-ification" is highly productive as can be seen by the following unexhausted list of words.

amplification
beatification
certification
clarification
classification
codification
deification
demystification
disqualification
diversification
edification
falsification
fortification
glorification
gratification
identification
justification
mystification
notification
ossification
personification
purification
qualification
quantification
ramification
ratification
rectification
reunification
sanctification
simplification
solidification
specification
stratification
unification
verification

Had the Newsweek article used the suffix in its known form, I probably would not have even thought twice about the neologism. However, without the initial /I/ or short-i sound found in the suffix, Newsweek's use stuck out like a phonetically sore thumb.

Granted the "-ification" suffix usually follows a consonant, it doesn't always, as exhibited by the word "deification". So based upon the linguistic template of "deification" and the known phonological pattern of the suffix, I think that "couch potato-ification" would have been a better choice for this neologism.

By the way, another thought that entered my mind when first reading this word was, "did they mean to say "couch potato-fixation", as in our nation has a fixation on the ability to be couch potatoes? As a matter of fact, when googling the suffix "-fication" without its initial letter "i" as Newsweek used it, Google responded with, "Did you mean: -fixation".

###

The article is also available on the Newsweek website and, interestingly, does not include the hyphen between potato and fication. Whether the word is written as "couch potato-fication" or "couch potatofication" it still sounds odd to me.

Linguistics Cartoon Favorites - Weiner Dog

How to Understand the Difference Between Accents and Dialects

Most people are familiar with the New York accent, the Boston accent and the Southern accent. However, the term "accent" really refers only to pronunciation. There are different pronunciations, vocabularies, phrases and grammatical rules that have been documented all over the United States. These are what are known as "dialects." Here's how to distinguish between the two terms.



A dialect is generally considered a mutually intelligible variety of a language. What this means is a dialect is different from a language in that different dialects of the same language can be understood by anyone who speaks the language, while different languages can not be understood by people who don't share a language. Just as most everyone speaks a language, everyone also speaks one dialect or another of that language.

The formation of a dialect begins when people from different language backgrounds come together and learn to speak a common language. The influence of the language backgrounds is what creates a variation on the language that is being learned.

Dialects take time to develop and also require that the group of people live close together while at the same time having some form of isolation from other populations. This isolation can be geographical, political, or religious amongst other forms.

Standard American English can be thought of as the median dialect or what the majority of people in the United States perceive to be the dialect from which all other dialects diverge. The reason people develop the idea that there is a standard dialect is that education and mass media propagate it. That is to say, this is the English we are taught is proper in our high school English classes, it is the way we hear newscasters speak on television and it is usually what we read in the newspaper.

When a person speaks differently, this does not mean that that person has poor grammar, is using sloppy, lazy speech or is any less intelligent than those who speak what is considered Standard American English. That person may sound different because he or she is following the rules of the dialect which do not always coincide with the rules of the language.