2942: Fluid Speech - Revision history

FaviFake: /* Explanation */

2025-07-27T19:37:02Z

‎Explanation

Planer28 at 20:51, 22 March 2025

2025-03-22T20:51:18Z

172.69.194.98: Nope.

2024-12-16T13:21:03Z

Nope.

162.158.179.105 at 02:25, 16 December 2024

2024-12-16T02:25:03Z

162.158.179.105 at 02:19, 16 December 2024

2024-12-16T02:19:17Z

Xurkitree10: /* Transcript */

2024-10-11T08:46:27Z

‎Transcript

JonathanDavidArndt: /* Explanation */ added some speculation on the phrase "One small step for a man"

2024-07-29T13:59:24Z

‎Explanation: added some speculation on the phrase "One small step for a man"

ChristmasGospel at 21:59, 22 July 2024

2024-07-22T21:59:56Z

172.71.134.245: /* Explanation */

2024-07-01T13:47:27Z

‎Explanation

172.69.43.185: /* Explanation */

2024-06-17T08:20:20Z

‎Explanation

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
-This comic is about {{w|sandhi}}.
+This comic is about {{w|sandhi}}. [[Randall]] states that people often unconsciously shorten words in various ways when speaking to optimize the fluidity of speech.
 He then presents four side-view diagrams of the human mouth and paths depicting how it might conceptually move (it depending a lot on how the individual normally forms even the major phonemes) when saying increasingly fluid versions of "going to."

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 The third diagram shows an even more efficient and very common pronunciation of the phrase, /ɡʌnə/ ''GUN-na''. Here rather than optimizing tongue movement hard-to-pronounce sounds are removed or further replaced instead. The /t/ is dropped leaving only /n/, while the vowel(s) of the first syllable go from /o/ to /ʌ/ between which the only difference is the optional rounding, or pursing, of the lips - though more likely given Randall Munroe's prior comics demonstrating a {{w|Phonological history of English close back vowels#STRUT–COMMA merger|ꜱᴛʀᴜᴛ-coᴍᴍᴀ merger}}, a supposed /ə/.
-The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same way that French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by an movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"
+The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same way that French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by a movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"
 In some ways, this may also help explain how Neil Armstrong's line "One small step for a man" was heard over the radio as "One small step for man". As you move towards More Fluid, the phrase "for a man" can quickly become "foreh-man" and then "fur-man". While extensive research has been done elsewhere on this topic, when given the choice between a technical problem with the radio, and issues with phonetic pronunciation under pressure, the latter seems more likely.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 | date      = June 5, 2024
 | title     = Fluid Speech
-| image     = frequency.png
+| image     = fluid_speech_2x.png
 | imagesize = 740x406px
 | noexpand  = true

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 | date      = June 5, 2024
 | title     = Fluid Speech
-| image     = metaball.png
+| image     = frequency.png
 | imagesize = 740x406px
 | noexpand  = true

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 | date      = June 5, 2024
 | title     = Fluid Speech
-| image     = fluid_speech_2x.png
+| image     = metaball.png
 | imagesize = 740x406px
 | noexpand  = true

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ==Transcript==
-{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
+{{incomplete transcript|A description of the path of the sound.}}
 :[Above the panel:]

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 29 July 2024
Line 22:		Line 22:

	The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same way that French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by an movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w\|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"		The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same way that French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by an movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w\|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"
		+
		+	In some ways, this may also help explain how Neil Armstrong's line "One small step for a man" was heard over the radio as "One small step for man". As you move towards More Fluid, the phrase "for a man" can quickly become "foreh-man" and then "fur-man". While extensive research has been done elsewhere on this topic, when given the choice between a technical problem with the radio, and issues with phonetic pronunciation under pressure, the latter seems more likely.

	In the bottom text, Randall comments on the perception of reduced pronunciations, remarking that while many perceive them as being sloppy, in reality deliberately pronouncing each word with the "supposed" pronunciation in its dictionary form sounds stilted, forced, and unnatural. The final T in the word "hot" is an example of this. Most people when thinking of T think there is only one way to pronounce it - usually the aspirated unvoiced alveolar plosive "tuh" found at the start of syllables - but in reality it varies widely depending on position and accent, most noticeable if one pronounces a word such as "teat". In this context the "t" in "hot" is replaced by a {{w\|glottal stop}}; funnily enough, and perhaps ironically, despite being the same sound it is never stigmatized, unlike intervocalic "t"s such as bottle which some speakers, particularly some British ones, also replace with glottal stops (rendered 'humorously' as <code>bo'oh</code>). It you speak English in the British "standard" Received Pronunciation form you may have to put on a fake American accent to understand this joke. It works best if you attempt an outrageous stereotype of a slurred non-English speaker.		In the bottom text, Randall comments on the perception of reduced pronunciations, remarking that while many perceive them as being sloppy, in reality deliberately pronouncing each word with the "supposed" pronunciation in its dictionary form sounds stilted, forced, and unnatural. The final T in the word "hot" is an example of this. Most people when thinking of T think there is only one way to pronounce it - usually the aspirated unvoiced alveolar plosive "tuh" found at the start of syllables - but in reality it varies widely depending on position and accent, most noticeable if one pronounces a word such as "teat". In this context the "t" in "hot" is replaced by a {{w\|glottal stop}}; funnily enough, and perhaps ironically, despite being the same sound it is never stigmatized, unlike intervocalic "t"s such as bottle which some speakers, particularly some British ones, also replace with glottal stops (rendered 'humorously' as <code>bo'oh</code>). It you speak English in the British "standard" Received Pronunciation form you may have to put on a fake American accent to understand this joke. It works best if you attempt an outrageous stereotype of a slurred non-English speaker.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:59, 22 July 2024
Line 63:		Line 63:
	[[Category:Fun fact]]		[[Category:Fun fact]]
	[[Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch]]		[[Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch]]
		+	[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 1 July 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:

	==Explanation==		==Explanation==
−	{{incomplete\|Created by sum'un who wud rite like'is all'u time if e'cud gi'away with'd- Title text not adressed. How would the utterance of the fourth panels actually sound? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
	This comic is about {{w\|sandhi}}.		This comic is about {{w\|sandhi}}.

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 The third diagram shows an even more efficient and very common pronunciation of the phrase, /ɡʌnə/ ''GUN-na''. Here rather than optimizing tongue movement hard-to-pronounce sounds are removed or further replaced instead. The /t/ is dropped leaving only /n/, while the vowel(s) of the first syllable go from /o/ to /ʌ/ between which the only difference is the optional rounding, or pursing, of the lips - though more likely given Randall Munroe's prior comics demonstrating a {{w|Phonological history of English close back vowels#STRUT–COMMA merger|ꜱᴛʀᴜᴛ-coᴍᴍᴀ merger}}, a supposed /ə/.
-The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same manner how French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by an movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"
+The fourth diagram shows the most reduced pronunciation. The /n/ is lost as a consonant in its own right, with only remnants of its existence found by the nasalisation of the preceding vowel where part of the airflow is redirected through the nose. (This is, incidentally, the same way that French got its famous nasal sounds - sequences of what used to be vowel + /n/ from Latin were reduced.) This way, the only motions one must make is to articulate the /ɡ/, which some would voice by an movement of the rear tongue although parts of the {{w|larynx}} may primarily be employed by others. This pronunciation seems almost unconnected to the original phrase of "going to". However, English speakers will still almost always understand this in context, and likely think they heard "gonna"
 In the bottom text, Randall comments on the perception of reduced pronunciations, remarking that while many perceive them as being sloppy, in reality deliberately pronouncing each word with the "supposed" pronunciation in its dictionary form sounds stilted, forced, and unnatural.  The final T in the word "hot" is an example of this. Most people when thinking of T think there is only one way to pronounce it - usually the aspirated unvoiced alveolar plosive "tuh" found at the start of syllables - but in reality it varies widely depending on position and accent, most noticeable if one pronounces a word such as "teat". In this context the "t" in "hot" is replaced by a {{w|glottal stop}}; funnily enough, and perhaps ironically, despite being the same sound it is never stigmatized, unlike intervocalic "t"s such as bottle which some speakers, particularly some British ones, also replace with glottal stops (rendered 'humorously' as <code>bo'oh</code>). It you speak English in the British "standard" Received Pronunciation form you may have to put on a fake American accent to understand this joke. It works best if you attempt an outrageous stereotype of a slurred non-English speaker.