THE PRONUNCIATION OF DERBY

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21436, 30 March 1935, Page 18

THE PRONUNCIATION OF DERBY

Perhaps'l am deficient in humour; but where the point of these records

ro THS SDITO* or TH» PR*S«. Sir,—l am sorry to see that the intelligent and thoughtful discussion initiated by Professor Sinclaire and followed up by the dispute upon the pronunciation of Derby should have degenerated, with occasional flashes of humour, into an attempted boosting of the New Oxford Dictionary. Whilst unequalled for meanings and derivations, this dictionary is at present, in the Homeland, deservedly subjected to much critcism by philologists for its faulty pronunciations. I must confess that if ever I should require an excuse for slovenly vowel pronunciation of English I should, without difficulty, find it in the New Oxford or in Daniel Jones. It is a remarkable but undoubted fact that people without ear and those finding vocal difficulties in giving the correct sound to a vowel and too liplazy to articulate a difficult consonant, will seize upon the easiest and most slovenly prounciation permitted. It is to be deplored that they will lind ample excuse for this in the dictionaries mentioned. Just two instances. In '•advantage" the final "a" is corrupted into short "i", and one is authorised to say "advantidge" instead oi "advant-age." Nearly all other dictionaries very properly give the sound of this syllable as written. If this is done without accent we get a euphonious sound that is worthy of our great language. Again, take the word garage, pronounced "garridge. What possible excuse can be offered for such an outrage? It would be far better and more sensible, surely, to make the steal perfect and spell it "garridge." There are thousands of other vowel inconsistencies in these dictionaries, notably that frightful atrocity, the substitution of the long "oo" for the dipthongal "u" in such "words as "iutc." This "u ' has been described as the last remaining beautiful sound left to our language. If this kind of thing goes on vandal Americans will soon tell us we are not doing our "dooty" to "Noo Zeelund." They will perhaps claim that they have the authority of a Minister in the present Government for this pronunciation! So throughout the Oxford, you will find authority for slovenly vowels that degrade our language. The plea is that custom permits the outrage—as if custom could ever make right that which is obviously wrong. <1 speak, of course, concerning matters outside present politics.> The marvel is that people who aver they dislike the affected Oxford accent should recommend its authorities as exponents of pronunciation. The truth is that it is easier for a person without ear, or uneducated in vowel sound, to follow this bastard mode of vowel mutilation, and so, finding some authority for it, they make no further effort to improve their voices or speech. (It should be noted, I am speaking of pronunciation only when criticising this undoubtedly great work."> As for Daniel Jones's dictionary, J wonder how many of his champions have ever taken the trouble to read his preface in the earlier editions? He says distinctly that ho does not claim that what he records is the pronunciation for public speaking or the stage; he deals with facts, not theories. Here are his own words: "No attempt. is made to decide how people ought to pronounce. All this dictionary claims to be doing is to give a faithful record of the manner in which certain specified classes of people do pronounce." In spite of this, one of your correspondents claims for Jones something he strongly denies. Users of this dictionary should know that they are merely leaching the speech of certain southern English schools, which this remarkable phonetician has observed. Any language is governed by its vowel sounds. English is no exception. Those who advocate the prostitution and elimination or elision of these sounds, either in singing or in speech, are doing a disservice to the most, noble and beautiful language in Iho world.' In a long experience I have invariably found that any British singer who favours singing in a foreign tongue to the exclusion of his own usually does so to hide his vocal inability to sing English vowels. It would indeed be interesting to hear some of your correspondents; attempt a vocal illustration of the sounds they advocate. Any person posing as an authority on speech should be vocally equipped sufficiently to isolate the vowel sounds, not only in a word, but in a sentence: that is to say, utterly dispense with Ihe consonants, and give the vowels, not onlv their accepted sound, but with the"correct inflexions demanded in the sentence. This should be performed with the full legato tone of production, as when the consonants are afterwards introduced.

Any English dictionary which advocates malformation, elimination, or elision of vowels, especially in final syllables, should be studiously avoided by all voice producers. Voice is in reality vowel sound. No really musical sound can be made on a consonant in singing. Then how can one expect a pleasant sound in speech by sliding the vowel from a syllabic or giving it the sound of another vowel? All this, of course, points to the burning necessity for spelling reform, which must inevitably be faced. Foreigners who are taught from infancy to observe vowel sound can speak with ease several languages. They first learn the vowel sounds of a language before the vocabulary: and their ears, being attuned from infancy, grip these sounds easily: while our inability to do so is a painful fact too evident for contradiction. As illustrating this, an Austrian brought me a letter of introduction from Mr C. N. Baeyertz. of Sydney. The stranger professed himself much puzzled by our writing one vowel in a word and giving it the pronunciation and sound of another, instancing "silent" and "moment." the short "e" in the final syllable being sounded "u," as "momunt," "silunt" He was much pleased when told that his "e" was correct. He then asked me to give him the vowel sounds of the Maori language, and the accented syllable. This being done, this man, although only a few hours in our country, gave me a perfectly pronounced Maori sentence. So much for training the ear in speech by vowel isolation, a fact utterly missed by those who advocate a slovenlv authority in vowel sound.— Yours, etc., FAROUHAR YOUNG. Sumner. March 28, 1935. to thi euiro* or ths prbss.

Sir, —At various times complaints have been made through the correspondence columns of "The Press" respecting the pronunciation of names, etc. Your correspondent, J. W. Tremain, calls attention to-day to the mispronunciation by prominent "sports' (why not "sportsmen"?) of Fracas as "Frarkus." The gentleman who put over the air a report of the last Wellington races must have been listening to Mr Tremain's so-called "sports"; but he varied it a little and called the daughter of Winning Hit and Scrimmage "Frakeus." That jarred; but when he would persist in telling us about "E—missary" I could not help feeling for the owner of Emissary. I, however, "rang off." But surely an announcer of races should be sure of the names of horses? —Youtv,, etc., NERVES. March 29, 1^35.