|
I definitely don't consider myself a stickler on the subject. However, there is one benefit to following the established rules of English grammar that often gets ignored - how you are perceived by others.
I work in a professional industry. Perception matters. Trying to communicate with a prospective client or colleague and not understanding the difference between a contraction and a possessive pronoun does not instill faith in others that you are on top of your game. It probably shouldn't be this way, but it is. I'm not talking about subtle nuance here, I'm talking about basic stuff. People WILL judge you.
You can take out of that what you want. I'm not trying to compel anybody by this example, just pointing out an empirical observation I've made.
|
Laziness. Not the intellect to judge correct grammar.
|
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer."
|
I've never seen an instance of "yore" being used. I didn't even know it existed. 
|
i never understood how people make these mistakes (on a consistent basis).
it seems to be primarily a native speaker problem and probably has something to do with learning to read/write at different times
i can't possibly confuse fundamentally different words/phrases like it's/its your/you're there/their/they're lose/loose effect/affect whether/weather..
oh screw it, just read this comic for the (surprisingly comprehensive) list:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling
some others not mentioned are should of, would of etc
though typos are another story. i don't really much care about it's/its because some people just don't like to type the apostrophe (sometimes i dont). however you can't really use that excuse on the other ones since you should be typing youre theyre and so on. casual typing only obviously (a la forums/txting)
then again, gotta keep it in context. a random post on a forum, meh. someone's resume? i throw it out on the spot.
|
I always have trouble with effect vs affect. Then I remember "the arrow affects" and "special effects". I'm sure most people don't care, but it definitely haunts me.
|
On March 22 2011 12:26 SCbiff wrote:
I definitely don't consider myself a stickler on the subject. However, there is one benefit to following the established rules of English grammar that often gets ignored - how you are perceived by others.
I work in a professional industry. Perception matters. Trying to communicate with a prospective client or colleague and not understanding the difference between a contraction and a possessive pronoun does not instill faith in others that you are on top of your game. It probably shouldn't be this way, but it is. I'm not talking about subtle nuance here, I'm talking about basic stuff. People WILL judge you.
You can take out of that what you want. I'm not trying to compel anybody by this example, just pointing out an empirical observation I've made.
You're definitely on to something here. The way you write can have a tremendous influence on how people in the workplace (or on a forum even!) judge you. I agree. I would make a couple caveats, though:
1. When you work in a given company, your fellow professionals don't judge you on how well you conform to "established rules of English grammar," they judge you on how well you conform to the conventions of that company's particular discourse community. That's an important distinction to make.
Elevating the "rules of English grammar" to the status of some superordinate standard is a problem. There are no such rules. It's similar to saying, for instance, that there are "established rules" of professionalism or ethics or appropriate workplace dress that extend over all industries. There aren't. Each company (or, if you want to look at a different levels of scale, each region in that company or each workplace in that region) establishes its own definitions of these concepts. The nature of their written discourse is no different. Each company establishes its own conventions in writing. To start prescribing "rules" in the abstract is to ignore these differences.
2. Even if you're in a situation where appearing correct is important, rote memorization of grammatical rules is an inefficient way to improve usage. Whole writing activities are much better for achieving that sort of flawless presentation.
On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer."
Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones?
|
Hulk, I found those studies results interesting, however I feel like you're really grasping at straws with regards to SCbiff's point on professionalism in a workplace. Memorizing grammatical rules is not important in terms of overall writing quality for sure, however if you write while bastardizing the different forms of "there" and "your" there are many people who would think less of you. For instance, writing "properly" is especially important when you are composing a cover letter or resume for a position.
|
There is a lot of space in space.
..............^
..............|
...........space
See what I did there?
+ Show Spoiler [The alot] +
This was so helpful for me when I had problem with "a lot" 
|
On March 23 2011 03:26 EscPlan9 wrote:
Hulk, I found those studies results interesting, however I feel like you're really grasping at straws with regards to SCbiff's point on professionalism in a workplace. Memorizing grammatical rules is not important in terms of overall writing quality for sure, however if you write while bastardizing the different forms of "there" and "your" there are many people who would think less of you. For instance, writing "properly" is especially important when you are composing a cover letter or resume for a position.
Yeah, I think you're right. Point taken.
I know that I tend to go into overkill mode in threads on grammar. I dislike grammar fascism so much that I tend to insist on grammar anarchy, which probably isn't the most helpful of positions to adopt (even though it's closer to the reality than the idea that there is one correct way to use the language).
My real issue with SCbiff's post (which is an admittedly minor issue and probably just a semantic quibble on my end) is just that he suggested that there are "rules for English," which there are not. There are only "conventions for discourse communities," and so I think it's a bit of a mistake to conceive of one overarching structure to any given language.
I stand by the essentials of both my points, though, even if they get a little extravagant: 1) what constitutes professional communication will vary from company to company, and 2) the sort of facility with language that allows you to consistently avoid embarrassing errors like "your/you're" mix-ups comes not from memorizing a bunch of grammatical dos & don'ts but from larger-scale, whole writing and reading activities.
So, yeah. On your advice, I'll chill out and quit looking for things to take issue with. But I do think that I am right about the basics of what I have said in this thread, and I think I am fairly communicating the scholarly consensus on those basics.
|
On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones?
So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation?
|
Whenever you use the word "collective," the noun following it should always be in the singular. That's the entire point and definition of the word "collective."
"The scientists put their collective mind together."
^That's right.
"The scientists put their collective minds together and failed epically."
^That's wrong.
|
United States10328 Posts
I'm pretty sure "it's"/"its" and "you're"/"your" are commonly swapped even in serious writing (for example, formal e-mails and even the news!)
In other news, "days of yore" is such a good phrase :O!
|
On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation?
No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones?
Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong.
For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com:
The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər
The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər
Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are.
I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're."
But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced.
Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way.
|
On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way.
"You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations.
As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning.
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common.
EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English.
And, for what I was talking about earlier:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/your
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you're
The first pronunciation examples for the U.S. entries both rhyme. The second don't sound at all similar. From where I am from (the midwest) the pronunciation of "your" is usually closer to the second example given, and the pronunciation for "you're" is either the first or the second. Most people I know don't rhyme the two.
|
On March 23 2011 12:01 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way. "You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations. As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common. EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English.
I don't even know if you know what you're arguing anymore:
wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer."
has become:
wherebugsgo wrote:
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're."
We agree!
|
On March 23 2011 12:08 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 12:01 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way. "You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations. As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common. EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English. I don't even know if you know what you're arguing anymore: Show nested quote +wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." has become: Show nested quote +wherebugsgo wrote:
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." We agree!
Correct pronunciation and standard pronunciation are two different things.
Newscaster pronunciation is correct, but it isn't standard.
So, obviously we don't agree, because you don't even understand the difference between the terms "correct" and "standard."
|
On March 23 2011 12:10 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 12:08 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 12:01 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way. "You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations. As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common. EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English. I don't even know if you know what you're arguing anymore: wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." has become: wherebugsgo wrote:
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." We agree! Correct pronunciation and standard pronunciation are two different things. Newscaster pronunciation is correct, but it isn't standard.
OK, so excellent. Now we're back to square one: in your view, what makes a pronunciation correct?
|
On March 23 2011 12:11 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 12:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 12:08 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 12:01 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way. "You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations. As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common. EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English. I don't even know if you know what you're arguing anymore: wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." has become: wherebugsgo wrote:
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." We agree! Correct pronunciation and standard pronunciation are two different things. Newscaster pronunciation is correct, but it isn't standard. OK, so excellent. Now we're back to square one: in your view, what makes a pronunciation correct?
If it's found in a well-established dictionary such as Cambridge, OED, or M-W, then it's correct.
Take these entries:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/you-re
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/your_1
Listen to the U.S. pronunciation (or, hell, the U.K. if you want) and you can tell that Cambridge CLEARLY differentiates "your" from "you're." They do NOT rhyme.
However, standard pronunciation varies from region to region. In certain regions of the U.S., the two words rhyme in the vernacular. In other places, they don't, and they also use incorrect pronunciations, i.e. those that are not listed in dictionaries. Merriam Webster is the most liberal with respect to pronunciation, as it lists the most.
I will also make the argument, for example, that "their" and "there" should rhyme, but should sound different from "they're." Also, "Mary" should sound different from "marry" and both should sound different from "merry."
|
On March 23 2011 12:32 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 12:11 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 12:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 12:08 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 12:01 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 23 2011 09:45 wherebugsgo wrote:On March 23 2011 01:49 HULKAMANIA wrote:On March 22 2011 12:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "correct" pronunciation. In your view, who gets to decide what pronunciations are the correct ones? So are you telling me you would pronounce "were" and "we're" the same just because there's no such thing as a "correct" pronunciation? No. That's not what I'm telling you at all. Out of curiosity, what makes you think that I am trying to suggest that "were" and "we're" are homophones? Anyway, I'll just stick to the point. It is not incorrect to say that "your" and "you're" are homophones. It is not incorrect to say that, for some people, "your" and "you're" are not homophones. It is incorrect, however, to say that those two words "if pronounced correctly" sound different from one another. That's wrong. For one, I could simply pull rank and show you the IPA pronunciations from dictionary.com: The IPA pronunciation for "your": yʊər The IPA pronunciation for "you're": yʊər Those two pronunciations are identical. They are textbook homophones. You cannot get more homophonic than those two words are. I could also suggest that you go to Google, filter for .edu sites, and search for "your you're homophone." You'll find a vast body of university-produced literature on how easy it is to confuse the homophones "your" and "you're." But what I was really trying to do with my last post was explain to you that there is no such thing as a "correct pronunciation." There is a wide range of pronunciations for any given word and each of those pronunciations is perfectly appropriate to the people that use them. So you can't actually argue that "your" and "you're," if pronounced correctly, don't sound the same. Linguistically, that's a nonsense statement. It also does not correspond to the reality that for millions of native English speakers there is absolutely no difference in how those two words are pronounced. Pronunciation determines whether or not you have a pair of homophones, not spelling. And it is very widespread and widely accepted to pronounce those two words the same exact way. "You're" has two different pronunciations in modern English, IMO, because it's a contraction and because of the confusion between it and "your." "Your" is also pronounced differently depending on the dialect, but "you're" either rhymes with "your" or it rhymes with "sewer." And, in most dialects, "your" rhymes with "door" or "pure." Almost every modern dictionary will give you these pronunciations. As for what is the "correct" pronunciation, yeah, it's debatable, but my point in referencing "we're" and "were" is that the contraction still retains the gist of the pronunciation. You don't see "we're" rhyming with "were," even though the words are spelled almost identically. In fact, if you say "we're" out loud you can distinctly hear that it's simply "we" and "are" getting mashed together. The same should hold true for "you" and "are," which means that "you're," as it is a contraction, should simply be the combination of the words "you" and "are" in pronunciation, spelling, and meaning. Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." All of the dictionaries have one rhyming entry for both words, but there are multiple entries for both, and it's debatable which usages are most common. EDIT: And while I agree that pronunciation subtleties are useless when it comes to communication, when it comes to formalizing English it is important. If newscasters talked like hicks from the Appalachians we'd probably still understand them, but many English speakers would not be able to. We've seen some controversy on this very site with respect to accents and pronunciation, and it shows that there is some kind of "correct" pronunciation when it comes to formal English. I don't even know if you know what you're arguing anymore: wherebugsgo wrote:
Manit0u is right though, "your" and "you're" actually aren't homophones. If pronounced correctly there is a subtle difference, precisely that "your" rhymes with "door" while "you're" rhymes more closely with "sewer." has become: wherebugsgo wrote:
Finally, no, there is no standardized pronunciation for "your" and "you're." We agree! Correct pronunciation and standard pronunciation are two different things. Newscaster pronunciation is correct, but it isn't standard. OK, so excellent. Now we're back to square one: in your view, what makes a pronunciation correct? If it's found in a well-established dictionary such as Cambridge, OED, or M-W, then it's correct.
Well, then, here's the good-as-gold word of Merriam Webster on the subject:
your:
\yər, ˈyu̇r, ˈyȯr\
you're:
\yər, ˈyu̇r, ˈyȯr, ˌyü-ər\
Obviously there are not only one, but three correct pronunciations in which "your" and "you're" are homophones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ev0Eg.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Oub75.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sYAAF.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/USznE.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BdiL9.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MSuiQ.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/53HaM.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ai3sN.png)
