General Discussion : 5858


General / 5858	5857 \| 5859

Subject:	Phonetics for "LUGNET" trademark and member IDs (was Re: member id's: simple numbers or something mo
Newsgroups:	lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general
Date:	Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:59:37 GMT
Viewed:	73 times

This isn't a complaint, just a suggestion. If you're going to try to spell phonetics you should adopt a technically precise notation. For example, you said: > [...] I once worked with a guy named John Muchow. [...] > His last name is pronounced MUHK-ow, but when he first started on the > job [...] we all assumed it was MOO-kow. That quickly somehow mutated > into "Mookie" and stuck for years. [...] It's not at all clear whether you intend your syllable "MUHK" to rhyme with "book" or with "fluke" (you didn't mean "muck" because then you would have just typed "MUCK"). Rhyme with "fluke" seemed most likely, until I got to "MOO-kow" and got confused. Perhaps you're trying to point out the placement of the "k". No, that can't be -- you'd have to introduce an artificial glottal stop to force the "k" into being part of the first syllable! Hmmm... You ran into a similar problem in your FAQ answer: http://www.lugnet.com/faq/?n=640 where you try to explain how to pronounce "LUGNET". You made the claim that "lug nut" and "dragnet" are pronounced with equal emphasis on both words/syllables. Not true -- most speakers accent "dragnet" and "lug nut" on the first word/syllable. Anyway, if you want something better, check the simplified English SAMPA code, described on my web page: http://www.mrob.com/sampa.html and a more authoritative source: http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/home.htm Examples: "moo-cow" would be /mu:" kaU/ and "LUGNET" is /lVg" net/. - Robert Munafo

Message has 3 Replies:

		Re: Phonetics for "LUGNET" trademark and member IDs (was Re: member id's: simple numbers or something mo
(...) Excellent! OK, by SAMPA, it would yup definitely be /lVg" net/ (thanks!). (And, BTW, I had heard of a "glottal stop" before, but I never knew there was such a thing as a "nasal sonorant" or a "bilabial fricative"! I'm thinkin' TomMcD and (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)

		phonetics
(...) Hmm. Y'know, you're right! -- I should've simply written MUCK. By MUHK, I was trying to get the "uh" sound. I'm no phoneticist! :) Anyway, so his last named is actually pronounced MUCK-ow, but we incorrectly pronounced it MOO-kow (or MUKE-ow), (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

		Re: Phonetics for "LUGNET" trademark and member IDs (was Re: member id's: simple numbers or something mo
(...) I assumed Todd did mean 'MUHK' to rhyme with 'muck'. I didn't think about it at the time, but 'UH' doesn't look much like it should be pronounced like the sounds in either "book" or "fluke". Steve (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: member id's: simple numbers or something more?
(...) Oh, believe me, I have looked at it...! :-) Been seriously looking at this on and off for years... (...) The gray areas I'm thinking of aren't so much the offensive or vulgar things (although I'm sure there are some things which are both (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general)

112 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search