[Ian Bell[_2_]]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
I'm not going to discuss this any more. I've made my point clearly, which
anyone is free to accept or reject. I'm tired of arguing with people whose
attitude is "If it is, it's okay" -- which is 99.9% of the human race.



They are not saying that. They are sating 99.9% of people are happy with
ambiguity in there lives. You, apparently, are not.

Cheers

ian

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On 5 Oct 2009 19:27:09 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Perhaps, but if he's going to start up an Academie Anglaise, I'd like
to be the first person to donate. Especially if it has the power to
put people in jail for using "party" as a verb.

That's at least unambiguous (as is using "jail" for "put in jail").

[William Sommerwerck]

My main regret with the English language is something that
is seeping in from the USA, and it is the demise of the adverb.
It is now virtually extinct over the pond.

In the US, "good" writing (particularly fiction) is supposed to be based on
nouns and verbs, with minimal use of adjectives and even less of adverbs.

I am annoyed that American "presenters" are starting to use British
pronunciations, such as putting the emphasis on the first syllable of
"distribute".

[William Sommerwerck]

It's very German -- and I'm of German extraction. But you don't
turn a noun into a verb or a verb into a noun, when a perfectly
satisfactory verb or noun already exists. That's wrong.

But a verb turning into a noun is a recognized and accepted form
-- the gerund.

That's not the same thing. I'm talking about the unmodified word itself.

The classic example -- the ur-example -- is "impact". Until recently, impact
was a noun, not a verb. And as a verb, it sucketh mightily. It is vague and
wholly generic. There are at least 20 other verbs that express the thought
better -- strike, hit, affect, harm, modify, enhance, degrade, alter, etc,
etc, etc.

If I were head of a news organization, I would block the use of "impact" --
verb or noun -- in all content.

[William Sommerwerck]

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

"Cache" is pronounced the same in English as in French:

http://french.about.com/library/pron...udiodico-c.htm

Click to hear the pronunciation.

[William Sommerwerck]

Perhaps, but if he's going to start up an Academie Anglaise, I'd
like to be the first person to donate. Especially if it has the power
to put people in jail for using "party" as a verb.

No, they are going to delete the word "like" from the brain of every
under-thrity-year-old first.

Like, when do you think this will happen, man?

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:02:53 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

My main regret with the English language is something that
is seeping in from the USA, and it is the demise of the adverb.
It is now virtually extinct over the pond.

In the US, "good" writing (particularly fiction) is supposed to be based on
nouns and verbs, with minimal use of adjectives and even less of adverbs.

I am annoyed that American "presenters" are starting to use British
pronunciations, such as putting the emphasis on the first syllable of
"distribute".


The British pronunciation puts the stress on the second syllable, not
the first, at least it does among those who know how to pronounce it.
A more annoying one for me is research, which should have the final
syllable emphasized, but now seems to be emphasized on the first more
often than not.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

"Cache" is pronounced the same in English as in French:

http://french.about.com/library/pron...udiodico-c.htm

Click to hear the pronunciation.


I think the confusion comes not from cachet, but from the noun cache -
or secret hoard and the adjective cache(with acute accent) which means
hidden. The pronunciations of these two are cash and cashay.

d

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

Otherwise the phrase would be pronounced "forts and foi-bleys."

Stephen

[Arkansan Raider]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Perhaps, but if he's going to start up an Academie Anglaise, I'd
like to be the first person to donate. Especially if it has the power
to put people in jail for using "party" as a verb.

No, they are going to delete the word "like" from the brain of every
under-thrity-year-old first.

Like, when do you think this will happen, man?



That's, like, crazy--like they'd never get away with it, dude.

---Like, Jeff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:51:28 -0500, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

Otherwise the phrase would be pronounced "forts and foi-bleys."

Stephen

No acute on the foible either... We always give that a distinctly
English pronunciation. If we tried to maintain the original French it
would be fwahbl.

Just for interest, this is all from fencing. The blade of a sword is
divided into two regions, the stiff part close to the hilt is the
Fort, and the whippy part near the tip is the Foible.

d

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

"Cache" is pronounced the same in English as in French:

http://french.about.com/library/pron...udiodico-c.htm

Click to hear the pronunciation.


My brief take on the pronunciations (comments on audio quality
welcome, of course!)

http://81.174.169.10/odds/cache.mp3

Recorded in my study. Rode NT1A mic, Behringer UB802 mixer, M-Audio
Audiophile 24/96 A/D, Adobe Audition.

d

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:51:28 -0500, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

Otherwise the phrase would be pronounced "forts and foi-bleys."

Stephen

No acute on the foible either... We always give that a distinctly
English pronunciation. If we tried to maintain the original French it
would be fwahbl.

Just for interest, this is all from fencing. The blade of a sword is
divided into two regions, the stiff part close to the hilt is the
Fort, and the whippy part near the tip is the Foible.

Yes, indeed. I stumbled upon these facts years ago but this is the first
time my knowledge has been relevant to any conversation.

I may look up "tette a tey" next.

Stephen

[hank alrich]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

It's very German -- and I'm of German extraction. But you don't
turn a noun into a verb or a verb into a noun, when a perfectly
satisfactory verb or noun already exists. That's wrong.

But a verb turning into a noun is a recognized and accepted form
-- the gerund.

That's not the same thing. I'm talking about the unmodified word itself.

The classic example -- the ur-example -- is "impact". Until recently, impact
was a noun, not a verb. And as a verb, it sucketh mightily. It is vague and
wholly generic. There are at least 20 other verbs that express the thought
better -- strike, hit, affect, harm, modify, enhance, degrade, alter, etc,
etc, etc.

If I were head of a news organization, I would block the use of "impact" --
verb or noun -- in all content.

strike, hit, and harm are also nouns

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[hank alrich]

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:51:28 -0500, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

Otherwise the phrase would be pronounced "forts and foi-bleys."

Stephen

No acute on the foible either... We always give that a distinctly
English pronunciation. If we tried to maintain the original French it
would be fwahbl.

Just for interest, this is all from fencing. The blade of a sword is
divided into two regions, the stiff part close to the hilt is the
Fort, and the whippy part near the tip is the Foible.

d

Yeah, but where's the barb(ed) wire in that??

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:24:38 -0700, (hank alrich)
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:51:28 -0500, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 06:15:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

So, it's okay with you if people start pronouncing "cache" as "cachet"?
THERE IS NO REASON FOR THIS.

When you say of someone's ability "That is his forte", do you accent
the final e of forte with an acute?

Yes, I do, because that's the way the word is supposed to pronounced.

No, the word comes from the French, and carries no acute accent. It is
the word for strong which is Fort, although it is used in the feminine
mode, which adds an E, and necessitates the pronunciation of the T.
The terminal E is silent. There is no acute accent on it.

Otherwise the phrase would be pronounced "forts and foi-bleys."

Stephen

No acute on the foible either... We always give that a distinctly
English pronunciation. If we tried to maintain the original French it
would be fwahbl.

Just for interest, this is all from fencing. The blade of a sword is
divided into two regions, the stiff part close to the hilt is the
Fort, and the whippy part near the tip is the Foible.

d

Yeah, but where's the barb(ed) wire in that??

Always barbed wire in England. You wrap it round the grip to make the
pain feel good.

d

[Geoff]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
It's very German -- and I'm of German extraction. But you don't
turn a noun into a verb or a verb into a noun, when a perfectly
satisfactory verb or noun already exists. That's wrong.

But a verb turning into a noun is a recognized and accepted form
-- the gerund.

That's not the same thing. I'm talking about the unmodified word itself.

The classic example -- the ur-example -- is "impact". Until recently,
impact
was a noun, not a verb. And as a verb, it sucketh mightily. It is vague
and
wholly generic. There are at least 20 other verbs that express the thought
better -- strike, hit, affect, harm, modify, enhance, degrade, alter, etc,
etc, etc.

If I were head of a news organization, I would block the use of
"impact" --
verb or noun -- in all content.



Please stop this dedantic thread already !

Now THAT'S something to get you knickers in a twist over.

geoff

[Geoff]

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
The British pronunciation puts the stress on the second syllable, not
the first, at least it does among those who know how to pronounce it.
A more annoying one for me is research, which should have the final
syllable emphasized, but now seems to be emphasized on the first more
often than not.

I hate that many Beeb presenters seem now allowed to use the ghastly
regional 'short A' in public.

geoff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:40:13 +1300, "Geoff"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
The British pronunciation puts the stress on the second syllable, not
the first, at least it does among those who know how to pronounce it.
A more annoying one for me is research, which should have the final
syllable emphasized, but now seems to be emphasized on the first more
often than not.

I hate that many Beeb presenters seem now allowed to use the ghastly
regional 'short A' in public.


Lord Reith is turning in his grave.

d

[Geoff]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
The notion that someone would want to re-mix everything differently
is a very new one.

It _used_ to be that people went into the studio with a notion of what
they wanted.

"A notion of what they wanted" , tempered by a notion of what was
possible/practical to reproduce by the technology of the day. A
restriction/constriction that essentially is no longer relevant.

geoff