Re: new Klingon spelling

Mark J. Reed wrote:

>On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:00:33PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
>
>
>>I was debating a hawk a few months back on this very subject: he claimed
>>that the pron. [ajr&k] was a deliberate insult/dehumanization, like
>>"Jap" in WWII.  This is some evidence against that.
>>
>>
>
>Do you really *need* any evidence against that?   It's just how many
>pronounce the name in English.  Is it also an insult/dehumanization that
>we say ['Izrejl=] (and other variants) instead of [jeSrAel] for the name of a
>certain other country in that region?
>
>To me, it sounds pretentious/snobbish - and in many cases is
>incomprehensible - when, in the middle of normal unaccented idiomatic
>English, someone (<koff>Trebek</koff>) breaks into another language's
>phonology just to pronounce the name of a country where that language
>is spoken.  I have the same reaction to [hA'wAj?i], which amounts to
>bragging that the speaker has actually visited that island paradise,
>unlike the boorish Ugly Mainlander listener who pronounces it without
>the glottal stop, tsk.
>
>
>
What if your dialect contains the glottal stop?  Is it allowed then?

>-Mark
>
>
>
>

Replies