Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site calma.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!ucdavis!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!calma!radzy
From: radzy@calma.UUCP (Tim Radzykewycz)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Pet Peeves
Message-ID: <55@calma.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Nov-85 15:35:50 EST
Article-I.D.: calma.55
Posted: Wed Nov 13 15:35:50 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 18-Nov-85 06:06:56 EST
References: <747@cyb-eng.UUCP> <1900005@datacube.UUCP>
Reply-To: radzy@calma.UUCP (Tim Radzykewycz)
Organization: GE/Calma Co., R&D Systems Engineering, Milpitas, CA
Lines: 51

In article <644@spar.UUCP> ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) writes:
>>How about "nuclear" pronounced "noo-que-lur", as if spelled "noocuulur"?
>> - David Schachter

>     Phonetically, this is a simple swapping of two adjacent consonants:
>	nuclear /nuwkl0y0r/	 vs 	nucular? /nuwky0l0r/

This isn't the case.  The "correct" pronunciation of "nuclear" not
/nuwklOyOr/, which has the only accent on the first syllable, but
instead it is /nuwkliyOr/, with the accent on the second syllable
(the one in question) and the [liy] sounds clearly enunciated.

The switch from /nuwkliyOr/ to /nuwkyOlOr/ is several-fold:
    1.  change major accent from second to first syllable
    2.  change 'iy' sound to 'O' (schwa -- "stongly" unaccented vowel)
    3.  metathesis in [lOyO] to [yOlO]

I think that the reasons this particular example bothers people are:
    1.  It is (supposedly) only pronounced /nuwkyOlOr/ by uneducated
	people, and these are a large group of the people who form
	the "anti-nukes" groups.  (Before sending flames, please read on.
	I'll get back to this.)
    2.  The accent change is "radical".

The more dramatic *linguistic* change is the second, however
the more dramatic *cultural* objection is the first.  It
seems to me that the major objection to mis-pronounced words
won't be uncovered by any amount of linguistic study, but
rather by cultural study of language (e.g.
sociolinguistics).

Item 1 seems to mean that the people who don't know anything
about nuclear engineering and nuclear technology are trying
to make the decisions about policy -- a no-good way of doing
business.

It may or may not be the case that the decision-makers are
influenced more by the anti-nuke protests than by engineering
types.  It also may be that the people who pronounce nuclear
as /nuwkyOlOr/ are not un-educated, but these facts do not
have anything to do with the argument I'm trying to make about
linguistics.

DISCLAIMER:  I know... this doesn't have anything to do with the
original article *or* with any of the articles preceeding it.
It also doesn't have anything to do with my employer, my employer's
maiden name or the girth of the tallest tree standing on Mt. St. Helen.
-- 
Tim (radzy) Radzykewycz, The Incredible Radical Cabbage
	calma!radzy@ucbvax.ARPA
	{ucbvax,sun,csd-gould}!calma!radzy