Re: alternative pronunciations of 'naive'

On Jan 28, 2:46 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:39:09 -0800 (PST): "Peter T. Daniels"
<gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:

On Jan 27, 10:07 pm, sobriquet <dohduh...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is there a difference between the two alternative pronunciations of
'naive' atwww.m-w.comordid
they erroneously link up an identical audio fragment to both?
Just curious, perhaps I'm not listening carefully enough, but I can't
make out any differences between the two.

Where do you see alternative pronunciations?

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/naive

It simply gives you a pronunciation that goes with either of the
spellings (with or without dieresis).

The sound fragments are identical, if only because they have exactly
the same filename.
--
Ruud Harmsen  http://rudhar.comhttp://rudhar.hyves.nl

Ah, the wonders of language. I also couldn't hear a difference, but
apparently some in this thread have convinced themselves that they
heard one.

reminds me of Labov's experiments - he would record people saying
similar sounding words several times and play the whole series back to
them later in random order and ask them to match the sound in each
recording with the word they were pronouncing - and many times
people would get their own pronunciation wrong.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: alternative pronunciations of naive
    ... they erroneously link up an identical audio fragment to both? ... The sound fragments are identical, if only because they have exactly ... the same filename. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: alternative pronunciations of naive
    ... they erroneously link up an identical audio fragment to both? ... the same filename. ... Ah, the wonders of language. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: alternative pronunciations of naive
    ... they erroneously link up an identical audio fragment to both? ... Where do you see alternative pronunciations? ... spellings (with or without dieresis). ...
    (sci.lang)