The Innovative Usage Thread

[Vijay]

I lose that t sometimes myself.

[linguoboy]

I do, too, but only (I think) in absolute final or preconsonantal position. So "the worst kind" but not *"the worst option". But I haven't made spectrograms to check this.

[Travis B.]

Yeah, I think I also preserve final consonants before vowels as well except in just and most.

[Zaarin]

I do, too, but only (I think) in absolute final or preconsonantal position. So "the worst kind" but not *"the worst option". But I haven't made spectrograms to check this.

Same. Though in a few words I think the /t/ metathesizes as a glottal stop, though the only word I can think of is sects [sɛʔks], which is not homophonous with sex [sɛks]. (In careful speech, sects is [sɛkts], though.)

[linguoboy]

Anyone else find themselves voicing the initial consonant of facility?

[HoskhMatriarch]

No, bu Ive heard a lot of people voicing /s/ in various positions. That combined with turning the th-sounds into /d/ in many dialects makes me think English is finally turning into other W. Germanic languages. If you hear anyone lenit their fortis stops to fricatives and affricates, please tell me, I can't wait.

[Viktor77]

Anyone else find themselves voicing the initial consonant of facility?

Yes, I can confirm that I do this. But isn't this more or less an established American English thing? As in "little," "at all," "water," etc.

I was wondering if others here often hear or use the expression more + adjective for a comparative traditionally formed by suffixing -er? I just heard "more angry" instead of "angrier" out of a native speaker's mouth and I know that I, myself, have been tempted many times to use the more + adjective construction where the adjective had a comparative form in -er.

[Yng]

Anyone else find themselves voicing the initial consonant of facility?

Yes, I can confirm that I do this. But isn't this more or less an established American English thing? As in "little," "at all," "water," etc.


????????????????

the initial consonant

I was wondering if others here often hear or use the expression more + adjective for a comparative traditionally formed by suffixing -er? I just heard "more angry" instead of "angrier" out of a native speaker's mouth and I know that I, myself, have been tempted many times to use the more + adjective construction where the adjective had a comparative form in -er.

Yes. Isn't it ~a thing~ that bisyllabic adjectives can often go one way or the other?

[Viktor77]

Maybe, I'm not very well read up on this aspect of English grammar.

Ha, I read over 'initial'. Nevermind then, absolutely not.

[HoskhMatriarch]

Anyone else find themselves voicing the initial consonant of facility?

Yes, I can confirm that I do this. But isn't this more or less an established American English thing? As in "little," "at all," "water," etc.

I was wondering if others here often hear or use the expression more + adjective for a comparative traditionally formed by suffixing -er? I just heard "more angry" instead of "angrier" out of a native speaker's mouth and I know that I, myself, have been tempted many times to use the more + adjective construction where the adjective had a comparative form in -er.

I'v heard that quite a bit, and don't think it's that new of a thing (although hearing crap like "more angry" or especially "more wet" just hurts my ears). What really baffles me is the people who appear to earnestly be saying "more ...er" and "most ...est", which doesn't really bother me since it's not making English into a degenerate analytic language (I mean, one of the first examples I heard was "most expensivest") but still makes me go like "where the heck is that from?".

[linguoboy]

What really baffles me is the people who appear to earnestly be saying "more ...er" and "most ...est", which doesn't really bother me since it's not making English into a degenerate analytic language (I mean, one of the first examples I heard was "most expensivest") but still makes me go like "where the heck is that from?".

Here in Chicago, that's a feature I associate with Spanish-English bilinguals (although it's of course not special to them).

[Imralu]

What really baffles me is the people who appear to earnestly be saying "more ...er" and "most ...est", which doesn't really bother me since it's not making English into a degenerate analytic language (I mean, one of the first examples I heard was "most expensivest") but still makes me go like "where the heck is that from?".

I've heard lots of Australians say "most furtherest" which is even more ridiculouser.

[HoskhMatriarch]

What really baffles me is the people who appear to earnestly be saying "more ...er" and "most ...est", which doesn't really bother me since it's not making English into a degenerate analytic language (I mean, one of the first examples I heard was "most expensivest") but still makes me go like "where the heck is that from?".

I've heard lots of Australians say "most furtherest" which is even more ridiculouser.

Well, if it's just on that word, I see that as conceptually similar to "furthermost", but if it's also on things like "most redderest" that would be weird.

[Ser]

What really baffles me is the people who appear to earnestly be saying "more ...er" and "most ...est", which doesn't really bother me since it's not making English into a degenerate analytic language (I mean, one of the first examples I heard was "most expensivest") but still makes me go like "where the heck is that from?".

Here in Chicago, that's a feature I associate with Spanish-English bilinguals (although it's of course not special to them).

Here in Vancouver I have also heard it from Canadian-born Spanish speakers more than from anybody else.

I wonder why the hell this is the case... I mean, in dialectal Spanish many people say más mejor/peor/mayor/menor, but this is limited to these four (since these are the only four adjectives with suppletive comparative forms), and I have a bit of a hard time believing they would extend this to every other adjective in their other mother tongue.

Also, why did you quote Yng in the Quote Thread for what he said? It doesn't seem Quote Thread-worthy to me.

[linguoboy]

I wonder why the hell this is the case... I mean, in dialectal Spanish many people say más mejor/peor/mayor/menor, but this is limited to these four (since these are the only four adjectives with suppletive comparative forms), and I have a bit of a hard time believing they would extend this to every other adjective in their other mother tongue.

FWIW, "more better" is probably the example I've heard most often in English.

Also, why did you quote Yng in the Quote Thread for what he said? It doesn't seem Quote Thread-worthy to me.

Hold on, you mean there are standards for that thread? Shut the front door, why did nobody tell me this before?

[Buran]

That combined with turning the th-sounds into /d/ in many dialects makes me think English is finally turning into other W. Germanic languages. If you hear anyone lenit their fortis stops to fricatives and affricates, please tell me, I can't wait.

I've got a few things for you from Vancouver English.

- Sometimes said [t͡ʃɹʌvl̩] for "trouble" (tr- and dr- affrication is standard in Vancouver English; my sister and I will joke that one can always tell a Canadian from an American because the Canadian will say [t͡ʃɹɑnow] for "Toronto").
- Sometimes my pronunciation of "back", "look", "take" sounds suspiciously like [bæx], [lʊx], [tʰejx] to my ears.
- Sometimes I say things like [bʌgɨd] for "bucket". There's definitely a tendency to merge post-vocalic /p t k/ into /b d g/, with compensatory lengthening before the latter (which I suspect will be fully phonemic within 50-75 years).
- Sometimes my "book" sounds an awful lot like [bʉk] to me.
- Sometimes I replace [w] with [ɹʷ] (not vice versa).
- Sometimes [ʒ] gets replaced with [d͡ʒ], though never in words with <-si> (maybe because this is /ʒə/? Or maybe ʒ > d͡ʒ / stressed syllable?).

Other than weird stuff going on with /r/...
- spirantisation of some coda stops
- possible phonemicisation of vowel length due to loss of voiced/voiceless opposition in post-vocalic stops
- fronting of back rounded vowels? Big maybe, and so far it only affects /ʊ/.

Definitely sounds like a move towards a more typical West Germanic phonology, which is cool.

[Travis B.]

I thought my dialect was weird.

[Zaarin]

I've been watching quill18's press release Let's Play of Civilization VI, and it's made me realize that his Canadian accent is a lot pleasanter sounding than American accents. :p

[Qwynegold]

Also, why did you quote Yng in the Quote Thread for what he said? It doesn't seem Quote Thread-worthy to me.

Bisyllabic bisexual?

[Sumelic]

- Sometimes [ʒ] gets replaced with [d͡ʒ], though never in words with <-si> (maybe because this is /ʒə/? Or maybe ʒ > d͡ʒ / stressed syllable?).

I'd assume it's partly orthographically conditioned. In general, not just in Vancouver English, [ʒ] is often interchangeable with [d͡ʒ] word-initially or word-finally since it only occurs in these contexts in loanwords and is generally spelled the same way as [d͡ʒ] -- with <j> or with <g> before <e, i, y>. Plenty of people use [d͡ʒ] in genre, garage etc. I just looked up the pronunciation of "fuselage" today since I wasn't sure if an anglicized pronunciation with [d͡ʒ] is commonly used (apparently it isn't).

[linguoboy]

Are "shorts" "pants" (bzw. "trousers")?

Today someone posted that this was "the third time I've worn pants since moving to Denver". I was momentarily baffled until he mentioned that he was in the courtroom today and thought shorts wouldn't be appropriate. Has anyone else come across a similar usage of "pants" to mean "slacks/long trousers"?

[Zaarin]

Are "shorts" "pants" (bzw. "trousers")?

Today someone posted that this was "the third time I've worn pants since moving to Denver". I was momentarily baffled until he mentioned that he was in the courtroom today and thought shorts wouldn't be appropriate. Has anyone else come across a similar usage of "pants" to mean "slacks/long trousers"?

"Pants" unqualified always means "long pants" to me; "short pants" are "shorts."

[din]

I was just watching an Indian YouTube video where "teaspoon" was written "tease poon."

Have you ever watched Manjula's kitchen? She pronounces all her initial st-, sp- and sk- clusters with an 'e' before them, like Spanish speakers. Consequently, she says 'tea espoon', which blends into a really long, sing-songy /i:/. She also says tabley spoon. Really endearing.

[KathTheDragon]

Are "shorts" "pants" (bzw. "trousers")?

Today someone posted that this was "the third time I've worn pants since moving to Denver". I was momentarily baffled until he mentioned that he was in the courtroom today and thought shorts wouldn't be appropriate. Has anyone else come across a similar usage of "pants" to mean "slacks/long trousers"?

I thought that was the usual meaning of "pants" in America.

[linguoboy]

I thought that was the usual meaning of "pants" in America.

IMD, all sorts of trousers--short as well as long--are "pants". I would not say, "I'm not wearing pants at work" because I happen to have on a pair of shorts at the moment. (I would say "I'm not wearing slacks at work", but Wiktionary helpfully tells me this word "is old-fashioned and now used only by older people".)

In direct contrast to British usage, however, "underwear" is not "pants". Again, if I say "He wasn't wearing pants", it doesn't automatically imply that he was not wearing y-fronts or boxer shorts.