Author Topic: "Wouldja" (Read 3067 times)

saxon75 · « **on:** July 20, 2009, 06:02:08 PM »

A lot of people, myself included, have a tendency of slurring over certain final consonants, as exemplified by the title of this thread. I find that I often say "would joo," keeping "would" and the vowel part of "you" as normal but slipping on the Y.

I'm curious: what's this phenomenon called in linguistic terms? And is this something that's likely to become a permanent feature of the language over time, or is it more regional?

The Genuine · « **Reply #1 on:** July 20, 2009, 06:45:32 PM »

1. I don't know how to do proper lists at GC.

2. I don't know the answers to either of your questions.

3. I suspect it's been happening almost since the beginning of language. Heck, birds probably even do it.

4. It probably makes things really hard on adult learners of new languages.

5. It's probably the main reason we will eventually become telepathic.

Jonathon · « **Reply #2 on:** July 20, 2009, 07:36:52 PM »

Quote

A lot of people, myself included, have a tendency of slurring over certain final consonants, as exemplified by the title of this thread. I find that I often say "would joo," keeping "would" and the vowel part of "you" as normal but slipping on the Y.

I'm curious: what's this phenomenon called in linguistic terms? And is this something that's likely to become a permanent feature of the language over time, or is it more regional?

That particular phenomenon really has nothing to do with it being a final consonant. It's simply the combination of /d/ followed by /j/, which causes the /d/ to palatalize to /d?/. The same sound change can happen anywhere in a word, I believe.

I'm a little confused by your second question. Are you talking about the pronunciation of "wouldja" in particular? It's certainly possible that it could become a permanent feature, but I don't think the question of whether it's regional is really relevant. Something can become a permanent regional feature, or it could spread over the whole language.

saxon75 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 20, 2009, 07:59:10 PM »

I just mean that I think that, currently, there are very few people, if any, who would consider that pronunciation to be correct, despite the fact that it's perfectly understandable. Like, nobody, hearing "Would you," would correct the person saying, "No, it's pronounced 'wouldja.'" I was just wondering if that's something that might change.

I had a psych prof in college who claimed that some day "nucular" would become the standard pronunciation of the word "nuclear." I don't know if that's true or not, but it seems like an analogous scenario.

Anyway, is there no specific linguistic term for this example of palatalization? And what about the combination of /t/ followed by /j/ becoming /t?/? To me these seem like examples of the same phenomenon.

Porter · « **Reply #4 on:** July 20, 2009, 08:27:21 PM »

Even if both of those become the standard pronunciations, that's a far cry from having the current standard pronunciations be considered incorrect.

saxon75 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 20, 2009, 08:40:45 PM »

I'm pretty sure that there are English words whose pronunciations have changed to the point where the original standard pronunciations would now be considered incorrect. I could be wrong though--I certainly can't think of any off the top of my head.

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #6 on:** July 20, 2009, 09:14:18 PM »

Quote

3. I suspect it's been happening almost since the beginning of language. Heck, birds probably even do it.

Bees do it. Even educated fleas do it.

sweet clementine · « **Reply #7 on:** July 21, 2009, 01:08:37 AM »

For some reason I feel like the ignorant and ineducated fleas would be more prone to this than the enlightened fleas. Just a thought...

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #8 on:** July 21, 2009, 01:50:41 AM »

Quote

I'm pretty sure that there are English words whose pronunciations have changed to the point where the original standard pronunciations would now be considered incorrect. I could be wrong though--I certainly can't think of any off the top of my head.

From what I understand "knight" didn't used to have silent letters. They were all pronounced, the "k", the "g", the whole lot of them.

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #9 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:34:01 AM »

Quote

And what about the combination of /t/ followed by /j/ becoming /t?/? To me these seem like examples of the same phenomenon.

You betcha they are!

Porter · « **Reply #10 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:36:12 AM »

Quote

I'm pretty sure that there are English words whose pronunciations have changed to the point where the original standard pronunciations would now be considered incorrect. I could be wrong though--I certainly can't think of any off the top of my head.

Sure, but that's a process that took centuries, right?

The Genuine · « **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2009, 08:39:21 AM »

Forte?

saxon75 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 21, 2009, 11:17:37 AM »

Quote

Sure, but that's a process that took centuries, right?

I don't know, though that certainly seems plausible. I suspect that this phenomenon I'm asking about has been around for a long time, too, though.

Jonathon · « **Reply #13 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:38:35 PM »

Quote

I just mean that I think that, currently, there are very few people, if any, who would consider that pronunciation to be correct, despite the fact that it's perfectly understandable. Like, nobody, hearing "Would you," would correct the person saying, "No, it's pronounced 'wouldja.'" I was just wondering if that's something that might change.

I suppose it's possible, but it seems unlikely to me. For one thing, this example occurs at a word boundary, so the change only happens with that particular pair of words, and for another thing it mostly occurs in rapid or casual speech, not in all speech. Though it wouldn't be surprising if /dj/ became /d?/ within words.

Quote

Anyway, is there no specific linguistic term for this example of palatalization? And what about the combination of /t/ followed by /j/ becoming /t?/? To me these seem like examples of the same phenomenon.

I don't think there's a term for that specific example. Usually terms for sound changes refer to classes of sound changes, like voicing or gliding or frication, rather than particular changes like /dj/ > /d?/. You could also call this change affrication, which refers to the manner of articular of the new sound, whereas palatalization refers to the place of articulation. But maybe you already knew that.

Jonathon · « **Reply #14 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:40:41 PM »

Quote

I'm pretty sure that there are English words whose pronunciations have changed to the point where the original standard pronunciations would now be considered incorrect. I could be wrong though--I certainly can't think of any off the top of my head.

If you go back far enough, virtually every word in the language has changed this much. Though I suppose that if you go back too far, you wouldn't be talking about English anymore but rather about West Germanic or Proto-Indo-European or something.

Jonathon · « **Reply #15 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:41:16 PM »

Quote

Forte?

There are still plenty of people who insist that forte should rhyme with fort. I think they're a dying breed, though.

The Genuine · « **Reply #16 on:** July 22, 2009, 08:50:31 AM »

Yes, but I don't think it took "centuries."

See the pronounciation note: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/forte

Jonathon · « **Reply #17 on:** July 22, 2009, 09:26:06 AM »

I think you're right. I've heard that most of the Great Vowel Shift happened in only two or three generations.