CHAPTER XII.

THE PRONUNCIATION OF WORDS.

It is simply impossible to express sound by writing, and therefore all instruction in pronunciation should be given vivâ voce. A pronouncing Dictionary may sometimes afford assistance; but in many cases it must fail, as it is an attempt to explain varieties or shades of sound by varieties of shape, i.e. combinations of written letters--in fine, objects of one sense by those of another.

It is not easy to fix a standard of pronunciation. At one time the stage, then the bar, and, later still, the pulpit, have been considered as authorities in this matter. But all these are now rejected, and the conversation of the highest classes in London society is now looked upon as the standard of English pronunciation.

Pronunciation, like everything else connected with language, varies continually with the influence of time and fashion; and it is well known that, even fifty years ago, many English words were pronounced differently from the present practice. It was formerly the fashion to pronounce ‘leisure’ (which now rhymes with ‘pleasure’) as if written ‘leezure’ (to rhyme with ‘seizure’). This was never a vulgar pronunciation; it was done by the highest classes. It was also the fashion to pronounce ‘oblige’ more like the French verb ‘obliger’ as if written ‘obl_ee_ge,’ and this also was the practice with the best educated. ‘Gold’ also was formerly pronounced by good speakers as if rhyming with ‘ruled;’ now it properly rhymes with ‘old’ or ‘cold.’

We may conclude, from some of Pope’s rhymes, that, in the early part of the eighteenth century, our language was not pronounced exactly as it is at present. He has ‘line’ and ‘join’ rhyming with each other; also ‘vice’ and ‘destroys,’ ‘power’ and ‘secure,’ ‘safe’ and ‘laugh,’ ‘obey’ and ‘tea,’ &c. Some of these may have been peculiar to the poet himself, and may be regarded as bad rhymes; still, as Pope was an authority for the language of his own time, most of them were, in all probability, recognised as correct.

Stories are told of the peculiar pronunciation of some of the leading literati of the last century which appear scarcely credible. Dr. Johnson is said to have pronounced the word ‘fair’ like ‘fear,’ and the adverb ‘once’ as if written ‘woonse.’ He also called ‘punch’ ‘poonsh.’ Garrick was often remarked for saying ‘shupreme’ and ‘shuperior’ for ‘supreme’ and ‘superior.’ He also pronounced ‘Israel’ as ‘Isrel,’ ‘villain’ as if ‘villin,’ and, still more strangely, ‘appeal’ as ‘appal.’

John Kemble had several peculiarities of pronunciation. He is known to have always said ‘bird’ for ‘beard,’ ‘ferse’ for ‘fierce,’ and my head ‘aitches’ (for ‘aches’). He persisted, too, in pronouncing ‘Cato’ with the _a_ broad, as if written ‘Cāāto.’ Of this peculiarity an amusing anecdote is related. ‘One evening, at the Dublin Theatre, after the performance of Addison’s tragedy, the manager appeared on the stage, and made the following statement:--“Ladies and gentlemen, to-morrow evening, with your permission, the tragedy of Cato will be repeated, the part of ‘_Cāāto_’ by Mr. Kemble.”’

Another story is told of the same eminent actor, who, when George III. said to him: ‘Mr. Kemble, will you “obleege” me with a pinch of your snuff?’ replied: ‘With pleasure, your Majesty; but it would become your royal lips much better to say “oblīge.”’

Some of the actor Quin’s pronunciations would be now considered very singular. He always pronounced the word ‘face’ as if written ‘fāāce,’ and said ‘trōpically’ for ‘trŏpically.’ Also, in a certain classical drama, addressing the Roman guard, he desired them to lower their ‘faces’ (meaning their ‘fasces’).

But, whatever may be the recognised standard of pronunciation, there always will be a refined and a vulgar mode of speech--one adopted by the cultivated and well-informed, and the other used by the rude and illiterate. It must be understood that there are only two ways in which our pronunciation may be at fault. 1. The accent may be placed on the wrong syllable; or, 2. a wrong sound may be given to the vowels. Under the first head may be placed such faults as the following:--Some will say ‘fánatic’ instead of ‘fanátic,’ and perhaps as often ‘lunátic’ for ‘lúnatic.’ Again, ‘mischíevous’ is wrong, both in accent and tone; for the accent should here be on the first syllable, and the sound of the second should be close--míschĭevous. We also not unfrequently hear people call the word ‘extánt,’ instead of ‘éxtant;’ but, as the accent is always on the first in words of a like formation--such as ‘cónstant,’ ‘dístant,’ ‘ínstant,’ &c.--there is no good reason why ‘éxtant’ should be made an exception. Another word in which the accent is often misplaced is ‘réspĭted.’ Many will say ‘respíted,’ which is decidedly against good usage.

In some words the accent still seems to be unsettled. Perhaps we hear the word ‘óbdurate’ as often with the accent on the second as on the first syllable. Many scholars pronounce the word ‘obdūrate,’ probably because the _u_ is long in the Latin ‘dūrus;’ but this must also follow the accent of similar forms. We always say ‘áccŭrate,’ ‘índŭrate,’ ‘áugŭrate,’ ‘sátŭrate,’ &c.; and therefore, by analogy, it should be óbdŭrate.’

By many the accent is placed on the second syllable of the word ‘applicable;’ but the general custom is to lay it on the first, and the best practice is to say ‘ápplicable,’ and not ‘applícable.’

Another case of wrong tone may be heard in the pronunciation of the word ‘_ínfĭnĭte_.’ We still not unfrequently hear in the pulpit, ‘infinīte goodness,’ &c. In dissyllables ‘īte’ final is sometimes pronounced long; as in ‘polīte,’ ‘finīte,’ ‘recīte,’ &c.; but in words of more than two syllables the final ‘ite’ is, with few exceptions, pronounced short. We always (properly) say ‘definĭte,’ ‘exquisĭte,’ ‘opposĭte,’ ‘favourĭte,’ &c.

Many have special difficulties in the pronunciation of certain consonants. The correct sound of _r_ is a medium between the strong rough _R_ of the Irish, and the feeble indistinct tone given it by the London cockney. The Irishman will tell you that he is very ‘wa_r_(u)m’ after his ‘wo_r_(u)k.’ But in London, one often hears, instead of ‘garden,’ ‘g_au_den,’ for ‘forth’ ‘f_au_th,’ and for ‘card’ ‘c_au_d,’ &c.

Many Englishmen have a difficulty in pronouncing the rough _r_, substituting for it the sound of _w_. These say ‘_w_oom’ for ‘_r_oom,’ ‘p_w_oduct’ for ‘p_r_oduct,’ ‘_w_agged’ for ‘_r_agged,’ &c. This habit, unless checked early, is likely to become incurable.

Others again contract a vicious habit of pronouncing the _r_ far back in the throat, instead of forming it by vibrating the tip of the tongue. This is what the French call ‘_parler gras_.’

There is one very improper use of _r_ which must be here mentioned; viz. the addition of this letter to certain words ending in _a_. Some pronounce ‘sofa’ as if written ‘sofa_r_.’ Also they speak of their papa_r_ and mamma_r_, &c. It is scarcely necessary to say that this is a positive vulgarism.

Nowhere, perhaps, is the perversity of our nature more evident than in the pronunciation of, (1), _h_ silent and _h_ aspirate; and, (2), _v_ and _w_. These sounds are constantly confounded. Many pronounce _h_ where it is not required, and leave it out where it should be sounded. They will say ‘abit’ for ‘habit,’ ‘erd’ for ‘herd,’ ‘ill’ for ‘hill,’ ‘old’ for ‘hold,’ &c.; and, on the other hand, ‘_h_all’ for ‘all,’ ‘_h_odd’ for ‘odd,’ ‘_h_uncle’ for ‘uncle,’ &c.

The same vice exists in the pronunciation of _v_ and _w_. It is clear that the speaker _can_ pronounce both these letters, but he inveterately persists in misplacing them. He will say ‘_w_eal’ and ‘_w_inegar,’ and at the same time, ‘_V_y do you _v_eep?’ These faults are made almost exclusively by ignorant, uneducated people.

Under this head may be also mentioned the incorrect pronunciation of _wh_ initial. By many the _h_ is here left out altogether, and these pronounce the pronoun _which_ exactly as if written ‘_witch_.’ In Anglo-Saxon, whence all this class of words comes, they were spelled, and probably pronounced, with the _h_ first--‘_hw_;’ and even now, if we listen attentively to those who pronounce them correctly, we shall always hear the aspirate first. We should surely make a difference between ‘_wh_o’ and ‘_w_oo,’ ‘_wh_en’ and ‘_w_en,’ ‘_wh_ere’ and ‘_w_ear,’ &c.; and, though it would be incorrect to mark the aspirate too roughly, the _h_ in such words should be always fairly brought out.

We also perpetually hear (especially in London) words ending in ‘_ing_’ pronounced as if written ‘_in_;’ as, for example, ‘stand_in_,’ ‘runn_in_,’ ‘go_in_,’ for ‘stand_ing_,’ ‘runn_ing_,’ go_ing_,’ &c. In one case a _k_ is put for the g. ‘Nothin_k_’ is said for ‘nothing.’

There is a disposition in many readers and speakers to give a sort of veiled sound to unaccented monosyllables, so that the true pure tone of the vowel is not heard. This is a very common fault. By such readers ‘for’ is pronounced ‘_fur_,’ ‘of’ is called ‘_uv_,’ ‘not’ ‘_nut_,’ ‘from’ ‘_frum_,’ and ‘was’ ‘_wuz_,’ &c. &c. It should be remembered that, whether such words be, or be not, accented, the sound of the vowel should always be full and pure.

A point of great importance is to always carefully give the true sound to an unaccented vowel which begins a word. We should never let _e_motion degenerate into ‘_imm_otion,’ ‘_e_mergency’ into ‘_imm_ergency,’ ‘_o_bedience’ into ‘_ub_bedience,’ &c. No accent, however, should be placed on these syllables, but the initial vowel should be always pronounced in its proper and pure sound.

It is right to be just as careful with vowels which are medial and unaccented. We should not allow ‘mon_u_ment’ to sound as ‘mon_i_ment,’ nor must ‘calc_u_late’ be pronounced with the u close. This fault often happens with words ending in ‘_e_ty’ or ‘_i_ty.’ We hear over and over again, in the pulpit, the words ‘trin_i_ty,’ ‘dign_i_ty,’ ‘soci_e_ty,’ &c. pronounced as if written ‘trin_a_ty,’ ‘dign_a_ty,’ ‘soci_a_ty,’ &c.

The pronunciation of the word ‘knowledge,’ with the o long, is still occasionally heard; but it is now almost universally called ‘knŏwledge’ (to rhyme with ‘college’).

Some pronounce ‘haunt,’ ‘jaunt,’ ‘taunt,’ ‘jaundice,’ &c. with the diphthong broad, having the same sound as in ‘r_aw_’ or ‘s_aw_.’ But all these should rhyme with ‘aunt,’ which is never pronounced broad.

The ending ‘_ile_’ of certain adjectives sometimes offers a difficulty of pronunciation. Here, in the words ‘hostīle,’ ‘missīle,’ ‘servīle,’ ‘reptīle,’ ‘puerīle,’ and ‘volatīle’ the _i_ has a long sound; but in ‘fertĭle,’ ‘fragĭle,’ ‘futĭle,’ and ‘imbecĭle’ the _i_ must be short.

Some incorrectly give the long sound ‘īle’ to the broader diphthong ‘_oi_l.’ They call ‘_oi_l’ ‘īle,’ ‘boil’ and ‘broil’ ‘bīle’ and ‘brīle,’ &c. In the age of the poet Pope, these two sounds were probably closer to each other than they are now; for he makes ‘_join_’ rhyme with ‘_line_:‘--

While expletives their feeble aid do _join_, And ten low words oft creep in one dull _line_.

A story is told of some one dining at a tavern who was asked by the waiter whether he wished to have his sole ‘_brīled_?’ To which he replied that he did not care whether it was ‘brīled’ or ‘bīled,’ as long as it was not ‘spīled!!’

The words ‘fast,’ ‘past,’ ‘mast,’ and other similar combinations are often pronounced either too broad or too close. In the provinces we often hear ‘m_au_ster,’ ‘f_au_st,’ ‘p_au_st,’ and ‘c_au_nt,’ whilst the affected Londoner says ‘m_ĕ_ster,’ ‘f_ĕ_st,’ ‘p_ĕ_st,’ &c.

Neither of the two is right, but the proper pronunciation lies between them. Again, ‘pūt’ (which rhymes with ‘foot’) must not be called ‘pŭt’ (to rhyme with ‘bŭt’), nor must pūlpit be called pŭlpit. Some persist in pronouncing ‘covetous’ as if written ‘covet_i_ous,’ and ‘tremendous’ as ‘tremend_i_ous;’ and these are apparently equally attached to ‘pron_ou_nciation’ and ‘ar_e_thmetic.’ Lastly, the participle of the verb ‘to be’ must always sound exactly like the vegetable ‘bēan,’ and not as a wine-‘bin.’

The letter _u_, in many words, is really a diphthong, and has the double sound of e + oo. This is heard in such words as ‘tüne,’ ‘stüpid,’ ‘tübe,’ ‘prodüce,’ ‘solitüde,’ ‘pictüre,’ &c., which should be sounded as if written ‘te + une,’ ‘ste + upid,’ ‘te + ube,’ &c., the one part uttered rapidly after the other. But many pronounce such words, incorrectly, as if written ‘toone,’ ‘stoopid,’ ‘pict_er_,’ &c. This is a vicious cockney pronunciation.

There is no termination we should be more careful to pronounce fairly out than ‘_ow_’ final, which, when unaccented, frequently degenerates into ‘_er_.’ The words are properly pronounced ‘wid_ow_,’ ‘wind_ow_,’ and ‘fell_ow_,’ &c., and not ‘widd_er_,’ ‘wind_er_,’ and ‘fell_er_!!’

The word ‘tobacc_o_’ also is often wrongly pronounced ‘tobacc_er_.’

Some, who would be over-refined in their pronunciation, make two syllables (instead of one) of the words ‘sky,’ ‘kind.’ They expand them into ‘ske-y,’ ‘key-ind,’ &c. This is an absurd affectation.

A clear distinct articulation is an essential principle of a correct pronunciation; for, unless every syllable be uttered clearly, the word cannot have its proper effect. How often do we hear careless readers and speakers push one monosyllable into another, so as to convey the impression that there is but one word, where, in fact, there are two. How often do we hear: ‘_Frin_ this case,’ instead of ‘_For_ in this case;’ ‘_Fra_ time,’ for ‘_For_ a time;’ ‘_Nevery_ occasion,’ for ‘_On_ every occasion;’ ‘_Tinders_,’ for ‘_It_ hinders!’ &c.

Special care should be taken to utter _unaccented_ syllables distinctly; as these are the most likely to be neglected. It is this neglect which produces such bad pronunciations as ‘reg’lar,’ ‘sing’lar,’ ‘sim’lar,’ and which makes ‘extr_a_ordinary,’ ‘extr_or_dinary;’ ‘us_u_al,’ ‘uzhal;’ and ‘vi_o_lent,’ ‘vilent.’ It is from the same cause that the _d_ in ‘and’ (a word which is seldom accented) is so frequently unheard, especially when the following word begins with a vowel, in such forms as ‘He _an I_,’ for ‘He _and_ I;’ ‘My uncle _an_ aunt,’ for ‘my uncle _and_ aunt,’ &c.

The Irish have several peculiarities of pronunciation, which must be here noticed.

1. They sound ‘ea’ (the long ē) as ‘ay;’ ‘plēase’ they pronounce exactly as ‘plays,’ and ‘tēa’ as ‘tay.’

2. ‘Door’ and ‘floor’ properly rhyme with ‘more’ and ‘sore,’ but the Irish give to these words the sound of ‘oo’ in ‘poor.’

3. They also pronounce ‘catch’ (which exactly rhymes with ‘match’) as ‘ketch’ (to rhyme with ‘fetch’). This is also a vulgar pronunciation in England.

4. They give the short instead of the more open sound of _u_ in the words ‘pudding,’ ‘cushion,’ and ‘foot.’ They make ‘pudding’ rhyme with ‘sŭdden;’ ‘cushion’ with ‘rush on;’ and ‘foot’ with ‘but.’ They also give the same sound to the vowels in ‘strōve’ and ‘drōve,’ making them rhyme with ‘lŏve’ and ‘dŏve,’ and pronouncing them as if they were written ‘struv’ and ‘druv.’

5. Another of their peculiarities is to leave out the ‘_g_’ in ‘strength’ and ‘length,’ pronouncing these words as if they were written ‘strenth’ and ‘lenth.’ They also omit the ‘_d_,’ in pronouncing ‘breadth,’ and call it ‘breth.’

6. They give the long sound of ‘_e_’ to the close ‘_i_’ in such words as ‘del_i_cious,’ ‘mal_i_cious,’ ‘v_i_cious,’ &c., and call them ‘del_ee_cious,’ ‘mal_ee_cious,’ ‘v_ee_cious.’

7. They pronounce ‘_o_’ before ‘_ld_’ like the ‘_ow_’ in ‘how,’ and they pronounce ‘cold’ and ‘bold’ as if these words rhymed with ‘howled’ or ‘growled.’