Re: LCC2: Meeting our Community

T. A. McLeay wrote:
> Joseph Fatula wrote:
>
>> T. A. McLeay wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIK, it's because it's pronounced /endZl&N/ i.e. as two syllables, and
>>> -ge- is one way to spell of soft g (cf. also vegetable /vedZt@b@l/), but
>>> -gi- isn't.
>>>
>> That's a _giant_ mistake!  (Well, okay, a minor mistake, but minor
>> doesn't have "gi" in it.)
>>
>
> -gi- does not spell a soft g. It spells a soft g with a following i (be
> it long, short, schwa, yod or other). (There are probably examples with
> -gia-=/dZ@/ or similar, but I had in mind a following consonant.)
>
>
Now I understand.  I don't think I've ever thought through how the word
"engelang" is supposed to be pronounced until now.
>> On another note - was "vegetable" originally pronounced with a /dZ/ in
>> it?  Is it still?  I'm not sure I've heard it as anything other than
>> [vetSt@bL\=], but the spelling would seem to indicate otherwise.
>>
>
> I pronounce "vegetable" the way I indicated; why would I have lied?
> (And, compare also with words like "vegetarian" that clearly indicates
> it was a /dZ/ regardless of what it is for you.)
>
>
Seems sensible enough.  "Vegetarian" does seem more like the kind of
word that would be borrowed/coined straight from Latin, though, as
opposed to "vegetable", which I'd expect to have come through French
first, which can introduce all kinds of pronunciation changes.

____________________________________________________________
ONE-CLICK WEBMAIL ACCESS - Easily monitor & access your email accounts!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!