When I said "some regions" I did not realize the extent of this phenomenon
in the U.S. It makes me wonder: Is this like the many features of London or
SE England accents that propogate outward changing the habits of speakers
through time and space. The pronunciation of the vowel in "bath" and many
similar words, where a fricative or a nasal +fricative follows, was earlier
like that in "trap" and still is for most regions. The non-rhotic feature
seems to center earlier in London and over the years has spread out across
the British Isles. (In the US it seems isolated to Eastern NE and the Deep
South.) Perhaps this voicing of "th" is another feature of British English
that has changed historically, while the speech of the colonies has remained
the more conservative in this respect.
My own singing habits seem to correspond to Scott's. Choir leaders often
have to instruct their singers to drop the ugly syllabic "r". This seems to
be in immitation of the normal singing habits of the British English, which
would be based on their normal speaking accent.
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Interesting that my idiolect has an unvoiced in bequeath, booth, tollbooth,
> with, herewith, wherewith, and forthwith, as well as absinthe, nepenthe,
> and panther. All of these I heard in my youth long before I ever saw them
> written. For 'without," as best I can reconstruct, I speak it unvoiced but
> sing it voiced
>
> I also notice that I give an unlaut on the vowel for many words with
> the voiced th but not with the high vowel ee.
>
> My formative speech patterns were those of the educated Deep South;
> my only exposure to other speech patterns in my preschool years was
> radio: I was an addict by age two. I thought that FDR sounded really
> funny in his fireside chats: Mother explained that Yankees do not sound
> like we do when we talk but that fact does not mean that you should not
> listen. Do not judge the value of what someone says by how unusual he
> sounds.
>
> Do other educated rural/small town Southerners have the same variation that
> I do? If not, do any such commenters 70 and over share my speech pattern?
> Is it a distinction based on race?
>
> Scott Catledge
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of ATEG automatic digest
> system
> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 12:00 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: ATEG Digest - 29 Jan 2010 to 30 Jan 2010 (#2010-10)
>
> There are 3 messages totalling 242 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. unvoiced TH and voiced THE (3)
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 07:33:41 +0000
> From: Edmond Wright <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: unvoiced TH and voiced THE
>
> I have come to notice a common preference in England for the spelling
> 'loath' over 'loth' (meaning 'disinclined'). I have always used the
> latter, following the general distinction between words that end in 'th'
> having that consonant unvoiced (rhyming with 'both') as against the verb
> 'loathe' (meaning 'intensely hate') which has the voiced consonant.
> However, I should not be pedantic because the addition of 'a' in the
> spelling usually does not disturb the application of the rule that it be
> unvoiced if no 'e' is added. Are 'loth' and 'loath' (as the adjective
> meaning 'disinclined') pronounced unvoiced in America?
>
> Indeed, a look in the dictionary shows that 'loath' -- with the unvoiced
> consonant -- has for a long time been used for the 'disinclined' meaning,
> presumably because of the semantic association between 'disinclined' and
> 'intensely hate'.
>
> Elsewhere the addition of 'e' (or 'er' or 'ern') does signal the voiced
> consonant (as well as change in the pronunciation of the vowel). The
> 'reverse dictionary' gives a long list, but here are a few examples:
>
> bath - bathe
> breath - breathe
> broth - brother
> cloth - clothe
> heath - heather
> lath - lathe, lather
> south - southern, southerly
> wreath - wreathe
> megalith - lithe
> moth - mother
> rath (Celtic earthwork) - rather
> sheath - sheathe
> sooth (obs. 'truth') - soothe
> teeth - teethe (cf. seethe)
>
> There are a few anomalies:
>
> VOICED (without added 'e' or 'er')
> bequeath
> booth, tolbooth
> mouth (verb meaning 'speak exaggeratedly')
> smooth (adj.)
> with (same as 'wither'), and 'wherewith', herewith', etc.
>
> UNVOICED (with added 'e' or 'er')
> absinthe
> anther
> ether (compare voiced 'either')
> lethal, Lethe
> nepenthe
> panther
>
>
> Edmond
>
>
> Dr. Edmond Wright
> 3 Boathouse Court
> Trafalgar Road
> Cambridge
> CB4 1DU
> England
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Website: http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/elw33/
> Phone [00 44] (0)1223 350256
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 05:44:35 -0500
> From: Brett Reynolds <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: unvoiced TH and voiced THE
>
> On 2010-01-30, at 2:33 AM, Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar =
> wrote:
>
> > I have come to notice a common preference in England for the spelling
> > 'loath' over 'loth' (meaning 'disinclined').
>
> The preference is international and historical. In fact, in the Corpus =
> of Current American English, 'loath' is about 50 times more common than =
> 'loth' where in the British National Corpus, it's only about five times =
> more common.
>
> > Are 'loth' and 'loath' (as the adjective
> > meaning 'disinclined') pronounced unvoiced in America?
>
> Merriam-Webster's online dictionary gives both voice and unvoiced with =
> voiceless listed first.
>
> Best,
> Brett
>
> -----------------------
> Brett Reynolds
> English Language Centre
> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
> Toronto, Ontario, Canada
> [log in to unmask]
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 06:07:20 -0700
> From: Webmail bdespain <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: unvoiced TH and voiced THE
>
> --0016e6d272f7abd6d7047e616e25
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Edmond,
> I have also noticed, at least in some regions of the U. S., that the "th"
> in
> "bequeath", "booth", and "with" have lost their voice. I think that the
> loss of voice in the common preposition may come in stages where some
> people
> let it vary depending on whether the next word begins with a vowel or not.
> Bruce
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Brett Reynolds
> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
> > On 2010-01-30, at 2:33 AM, Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I have come to notice a common preference in England for the spelling
> > > 'loath' over 'loth' (meaning 'disinclined').
> >
> > The preference is international and historical. In fact, in the Corpus of
> > Current American English, 'loath' is about 50 times more common than
> 'loth'
> > where in the British National Corpus, it's only about five times more
> > common.
> >
> > > Are 'loth' and 'loath' (as the adjective
> > > meaning 'disinclined') pronounced unvoiced in America?
> >
> > Merriam-Webster's online dictionary gives both voice and unvoiced with
> > voiceless listed first.
> >
> > Best,
> > Brett
> >
> > -----------------------
> > Brett Reynolds
> > English Language Centre
> > Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
> > Toronto, Ontario, Canada
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> > at:
> > http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> --0016e6d272f7abd6d7047e616e25
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <div>Edmond,</div>
> <div>I have also noticed, at least in some regions of the U. S., that the
> &=
> quot;th" in "bequeath", "booth", and
> "with&qu=
> ot; have lost their voice.=A0 I think that the loss of voice in the common
> =
> preposition may come in stages where some people let it vary depending on
> w=
> hether the next word begins with a vowel or not.=A0 </div>
>
> <div>Bruce<br><br></div>
> <div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Brett Reynolds
> =
> <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]
> ">brett.rey=
> [log in to unmask]</a>></span> wrote:<br>
> <blockquote style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px
> 0.8ex=
> ; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class=3D"gmail_quote">
> <div class=3D"im">On 2010-01-30, at 2:33 AM, Assembly for the Teaching of
> E=
> nglish Grammar wrote:<br><br>> I have come to notice a common
> preference=
> in England for the spelling<br>> 'loath' over 'loth'
> (m=
> eaning 'disinclined').<br>
> <br></div>The preference is international and historical. In fact, in the
> C=
> orpus of Current American English, 'loath' is about 50 times more
> c=
> ommon than 'loth' where in the British National Corpus, it's
> on=
> ly about five times more common.<br>
>
> <div class=3D"im"><br>> Are 'loth' and 'loath' (as the
> a=
> djective<br>> meaning 'disinclined') pronounced unvoiced in
> Amer=
> ica?<br><br></div>Merriam-Webster's online dictionary gives both voice
> =
> and unvoiced with voiceless listed first.<br>
> <br>Best,<br>Brett<br><br>-----------------------<br>Brett
> Reynolds<br>Engl=
> ish Language Centre<br>Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced
> =
> Learning<br>Toronto, Ontario, Canada<br><font color=3D"#888888"><a
> href=3D"=
> mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
> </font>
> <div>
> <div></div>
> <div class=3D"h5"><br>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit
> the=
> list's web interface at:<br>=A0 =A0 <a href=3D"
> http://listserv.muohio.=
> edu/archives/ateg.html" target=3D"_blank">
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archiv=
> es/ateg.html</a><br>
> and select "Join or leave the list"<br><br>Visit ATEG's web
> s=
> ite at <a href=3D"http://ateg.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://ateg.org/
> </a><=
> br></div></div></blockquote></div><br>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
> <p>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> --0016e6d272f7abd6d7047e616e25--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of ATEG Digest - 29 Jan 2010 to 30 Jan 2010 (#2010-10)
> **********************************************************
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/