[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Cómo se dice ther[o]pod y synapsid e

I do not know if we can talk about dialects between the Spanish we
talk in different regions of the former Spanish Empire. For Spanish I
mean Castilian, putting aside other languages of Spain such as
Catalan. We have some different words in the different countries
talking Castilian, some pronunciate some consonants different, but the
grammar is the same. Anyway, I wonder what the difference is between
dialects and languages, and expect it not to be something like the
difference between families and genus (just that one is within the

El día 17 de abril de 2010 11:28, Raptorial Talon
<raptorialtalon@gmail.com> escribió:
> " not a connection - just that the mispronounciation "new killer" is a
> functional name that makes sense (at all)...unlike another
> mispronounciation I've heard: "nu kea lurrr"."
> I've never heard anybody attempt to pronounce "nuclear" in a way that
> would convey "new killer," especially since the intonation would have
> be completely different for that to make any sense conversationally.
> I've heard "nookyoolar" and very rarely "nuke'lar," but never anything
> like "newkiller."
> So the idea of a Pentagon connection between "nuclear" and the
> capabilities of the device does still strike me as suspect . . . in
> part because it's also extremely contrived in American English -
> almost as contrived as if one were to use "rifle" to convey "full of
> rye" in some context or other.
> -----
> "Well, sure, Latinate names are phonetic, if you pronounce them in Latin!"
> Not what I mean. "Nukular" requires the removal of one consonant sound
> ("cl") and the addition of another vowel sound (a second "u"). This is
> the equivalent of saying "Deinonycuhus" or "Dipulodocus." So I was
> suggesting that, at least for scientific names, we don't generally
> have the problem of people dropping and replacing syllables
> willy-nilly: people say only what's really there, with only the
> interpretation of *existing* syllables being variable.