Discussion:
Pronunciation of "degrees"
Add Reply
Stefan Ram
2017-10-08 17:05:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-08 17:09:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
--
athel
b***@aol.com
2017-10-08 17:33:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
Yes, but maybe the OP applies "Auslautverhärtung" to English.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
--
athel
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2017-10-08 17:57:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:09:12 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
Me too.

A voiceless pronounciation of "degrees" could easily be mistaken for
"degrease", to remove grease from.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-09 15:08:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:09:12 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
Me too.
A voiceless pronounciation of "degrees" could easily be mistaken for
"degrease", to remove grease from.
Beat me to it.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Richard Yates
2017-10-08 19:37:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:09:12 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
Nor have I that I can remember. It's possible that final "S" in
"degrees" could be voiced or unvoiced depending on the phoneme that
starts the next word.

If I say "degrees top the list" I think the voicing of the "EE" trails
off early in the "S" and it is unvoiced as it slides into the "T".

Try saying it out loud both ways while touching your larynx to feel
the voicing. I don't hear or feel much difference unless I make a
clear break between the words with an unvoiced "S" and then it comes
out "degrease tops".
Dingbat
2017-10-09 06:51:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
--
athel
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.

He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
Peter Moylan
2017-10-09 11:54:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
In this context, you need to be careful about using Anglophone/Germanic
as a label.

As a first approximation:
- German tends to voice an 's' at the beginning of a word,
but not at the end.
- English tends to voice an 's' at the end of a word,
but not at the beginning.

Of course this is a crude rule that has plenty of exceptions, but I
think it's sufficient to demonstrate that English-speaker intuition and
German-speaker intuition disagree about when an 's' should be voiced.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-09 15:13:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In this context, you need to be careful about using Anglophone/Germanic as a label.
 - German tends to voice an 's' at the beginning of a word,
    but not at the end.
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is un-voiced. I have a bit of
bother with "zusammen".
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Stefan Ram
2017-10-09 17:19:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
/tsu'***@n/
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-09 17:24:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Thank you.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-10 06:03:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
--
athel
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-10 07:26:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in English (though English
spelling being what it is I suppose there may be exceptions) and French, and always
unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta. And in English after a consonant it's unvoiced, isn't it?
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Peter Moylan
2017-10-10 07:36:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta. And in English after a consonant
it's unvoiced, isn't it?
Unzip.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-10 08:19:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta. And in English after a consonant
it's unvoiced, isn't it?
Unzip.
Zigzag.
--
athel
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-10 11:05:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta. And in English after a consonant
it's unvoiced, isn't it?
Unzip.
Zigzag.
So no, not always then.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-10 13:01:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta. And in English after a consonant
it's unvoiced, isn't it?
Unzip.
Zigzag.
So no, not always then.
Just in borrowings from other languages, such as "pizza"? This topic
started with "chintz", which is from Hindi. Etymonline.org says, "The
plural (the more common form of the word in commercial use) became
regarded as singular by late 18c., and for unknown reason shifted -s to
-z; perhaps after /quartz/."
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-10 08:17:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
Uh? In Castilian Spanish it's theta.
True, but it's unvoiced, which is what the discussion is about.
Post by Paul Carmichael
And in English after a consonant it's unvoiced, isn't it?
--
athel
Dingbat
2017-10-10 12:03:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Paul Carmichael
And the other way around, no? A Z at the start of a word is
un-voiced. I have a bit of bother with "zusammen".
Isn't z _always_ unvoiced in German? Just as it's always voiced in
English (though English spelling being what it is I suppose there may
be exceptions) and French, and always unvoiced in Spanish?
<tz> is unvoiced for many English speakers. I find its /ts/ rendering
especially jarring because /t/ has an alveolar realization in English;
/Ts/ looks better to me. But then, my /T/ has a denti-alveolar plosive
allophone which only some Anglophones, like the Irish, might have.
Dingbat
2017-10-09 22:30:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced. I've never heard it voiceless.
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
In this context, you need to be careful about using Anglophone/Germanic
as a label.
- German tends to voice an 's' at the beginning of a word,
but not at the end.
- English tends to voice an 's' at the end of a word,
but not at the beginning.
Of course this is a crude rule that has plenty of exceptions, but I
think it's sufficient to demonstrate that English-speaker intuition and
German-speaker intuition disagree about when an 's' should be voiced.
Thanks for the correction. Then, in a German accent, do English plurals
end in [s] rather than [z] in the contexts discussed on this thread?
Stefan Ram
2017-10-09 22:46:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Thanks for the correction. Then, in a German accent, do English plurals
end in [s] rather than [z] in the contexts discussed on this thread?
In a German accent, no word ends with a [z], [d], [g], [v] or [b].
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-09 12:45:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
Dingbat
2017-10-09 22:45:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
The tricky thing about referring to <z> in Devanagari is that in the
Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet, <z> is a palatal sibilant similar to
the Pinyin <x>.

Be that as it may, restricting the meaning of <z> to what you say it is,
there isn't a <z> in the subset of Devanagari used for Sanskrit and Marathi
but there is a <z> in Unicode Devanagari; the character is U+095B;
the grapheme is <j> with an underdot. This is longstanding usage, not
an innovation introduced with Unicode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_(Unicode_block)
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-10 03:16:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite of
Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
The tricky thing about referring to <z> in Devanagari is that in the
Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet, <z> is a palatal sibilant similar to
the Pinyin <x>.
Sorry, I've never heard of "the Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet."

Sanskrit has three sibilants, traditionally spelled s, s-underdot [retroflex],
and s-acute [palatal]. The Indian languages retain the spellings but merge the
sounds.
Post by Dingbat
Be that as it may, restricting the meaning of <z> to what you say it is,
there isn't a <z> in the subset of Devanagari used for Sanskrit and Marathi
but there is a <z> in Unicode Devanagari; the character is U+095B;
the grapheme is <j> with an underdot. This is longstanding usage, not
an innovation introduced with Unicode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_(Unicode_block)
That is a Hindi letter. There are half a dozen underdotted letters in Hindi.
Dingbat
2017-10-10 03:55:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite
of Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
The tricky thing about referring to <z> in Devanagari is that in the
Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet, <z> is a palatal sibilant similar to
the Pinyin <x>.
Sorry, I've never heard of "the Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet."
Here you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard-Kyoto
The last 4 letters are z S s h
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Sanskrit has three sibilants, traditionally spelled s, s-underdot
[retroflex], and s-acute [palatal]. The Indian languages retain the
spellings but merge the sounds.
The sounds are distinct in Malayalam and in Hindi with a Malayali accent.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Be that as it may, restricting the meaning of <z> to what you say it is,
there isn't a <z> in the subset of Devanagari used for Sanskrit and
Marathi but there is a <z> in Unicode Devanagari; the character is
U+095B; the grapheme is <j> with an underdot. This is longstanding
usage, not an innovation introduced with Unicode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_(Unicode_block)
That is a Hindi letter.
DEVANAGARI LETTER ZA is what the Unicode Devanagari code chart calls it.
http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-0900.pdf
Post by Peter T. Daniels
There are half a dozen underdotted letters in Hindi.
There are 11 pre-composed underdotted akshars in Unicode Devanagari.
Not all of them are used for Hindi. Additional underdotted akshars
can be composed by combining an akshar and and underdot.
The only place where I've seen this done is in a proposal for writing
Sindhi in Devanagari.
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-10 12:24:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the opposite
of Anglophone/ Germanic pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
The tricky thing about referring to <z> in Devanagari is that in the
Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet, <z> is a palatal sibilant similar to
the Pinyin <x>.
Sorry, I've never heard of "the Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard-Kyoto
"The Harvard-Kyoto Convention[1] is a system for transliterating Sanskrit and other languages that use the Devanāgarī script into ASCII.[citation needed] It is predominantly used informally in e-mail,"

Jeez.

It originated as a workaround for coding Sanskrit in ASCII decades ago.
Post by Dingbat
The last 4 letters are z S s h
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Sanskrit has three sibilants, traditionally spelled s, s-underdot
[retroflex], and s-acute [palatal]. The Indian languages retain the
spellings but merge the sounds.
The sounds are distinct in Malayalam and in Hindi with a Malayali accent.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Be that as it may, restricting the meaning of <z> to what you say it is,
there isn't a <z> in the subset of Devanagari used for Sanskrit and
Marathi but there is a <z> in Unicode Devanagari; the character is
U+095B; the grapheme is <j> with an underdot. This is longstanding
usage, not an innovation introduced with Unicode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_(Unicode_block)
That is a Hindi letter.
DEVANAGARI LETTER ZA is what the Unicode Devanagari code chart calls it.
http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-0900.pdf
Do you want me AGAIN to describe the follies of the Unicode management?
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
There are half a dozen underdotted letters in Hindi.
There are 11 pre-composed underdotted akshars in Unicode Devanagari.
Not all of them are used for Hindi. Additional underdotted akshars
can be composed by combining an akshar and and underdot.
The only place where I've seen this done is in a proposal for writing
Sindhi in Devanagari.
And how far has that gotten?

Are you proposing to forcibly convert all Sindhi speakers from Muslim to Hindu?
Dingbat
2017-10-10 13:29:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
I tried getting someone from India to write chins and chintz in
Devanagari.
He ended the former with [s] and the latter with [z], the
opposite of Anglophone pronunciation.
An interesting trick, since there's no <z> character in Devanagari.
The tricky thing about referring to <z> in Devanagari is that in the
Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet, <z> is a palatal sibilant similar
to the Pinyin <x>.
Sorry, I've never heard of "the Harvard-Kyoto Sanskrit alphabet."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard-Kyoto
"The Harvard-Kyoto Convention[1] is a system for transliterating Sanskrit and other languages that use the Devanāgarī script into ASCII.[citation needed] It is predominantly used informally in e-mail,"
Jeez.
It originated as a workaround for coding Sanskrit in ASCII'
I don't know how much it is still used for Latin transcription but the
similar, and possibly derivative, Madras University scheme for Latin
transcription of Tamil is still used and Harvard-Kyoto is still used
as an input method for Devanagari on a QWERTY (or AZERTY) keyboard:

Jun 1, 2012 - In order to present Devanāgarī or IAST text on Sanskrita.org,
you will need to type it in as HK (Harvard-Kyoto) text.
http://sanskrita.org/wiki/index.php/Converter
Post by Peter T. Daniels
decades ago.
Itrans, popularized for writing (and as an input method for) Hindi film song
lyrics is more recent (~1998); it has the last letters as sha Sha sa ha:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITRANS
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
there is a <z> in Unicode Devanagari; the character is
U+095B; the grapheme is <j> with an underdot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_(Unicode_block)
That is a Hindi letter.
DEVANAGARI LETTER ZA is what the Unicode Devanagari code chart calls it.
http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-7.0/U70-0900.pdf
Do you want me AGAIN to describe the follies of the Unicode management?
Not particularly. What they call it is what I called it; I haven't yet
seen a compelling reason to deviate from their usage. Most recently,
I've been pleased with them for their extended Devanagari even if all
they did was to compile others' work.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Peter T. Daniels
There are half a dozen underdotted letters in Hindi.
There are 11 pre-composed underdotted akshars in Unicode Devanagari.
Not all of them are used for Hindi. Additional underdotted akshars
can be composed by combining an akshar and and underdot.
The only place where I've seen this done is in a proposal for writing
Sindhi in Devanagari.
And how far has that gotten?
No idea. I suspect that adapting Devanagari to additional languages would be
a greater success if it were adapted to a code switched pronunciation of
loans from English, the most popular donor language for esoteric terms and
phrases borrowed into languages typically written in Devanagari. Using
code switched pronunciation rather than Indified pronunciation would
be an advantage in certain kinds of employment and wouldn't be a
disadvantage when speaking an Indian language; the upper crust already
code switches while speaking Indian languages by using English
pronunciations rather than Indified pronunciations that are written.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Are you proposing to forcibly convert all Sindhi speakers from Muslim to Hindu?
First off, it wasn't my proposal; it was one I saw. Secondly, it was for
Sindhi speakers spread across India, invariably Hindu, to be able to read
and write their language. Nearly all of them already know how the
Devanagari abugida is used for Hindi but only the aged among them
already know how the Perso-Arabic abjad is used for Sindhi. Thirdly,
there's no need to be derisive; if one proposal fails, a future proposal
might succeed by learning from failure.
Ken Blake
2017-10-08 19:07:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.

I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.

It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-08 20:36:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
I was going to agree with "any" till I thought of "dice".
--
Jerry Friedman
Stefan Ram
2017-10-08 20:47:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Some web pages say,

dI'gris

nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/degrees

, some web pages say,

dI'griz

www.slownictwo.pl/?txt=degrees

. I am just a lowly non-native speaker.

How am I supposed to know which page is right?
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-09 03:58:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Jerry Friedman
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Some web pages say,
dI'gris
nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/degrees
, some web pages say,
dI'griz
www.slownictwo.pl/?txt=degrees
. I am just a lowly non-native speaker.
How am I supposed to know which page is right?
Not the Dutch one, when the subject is English pronunciation.

A lot of us Americans devoice final consonants, or maybe start the
consonant voiced and end it unvoiced (when possible). The sound file on
that page in Dutch sounds that way to me.
--
Jerry Friedman
Stefan Ram
2017-10-09 04:22:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
A lot of us Americans devoice final consonants, or maybe start the
consonant voiced and end it unvoiced (when possible). The sound file on
that page in Dutch sounds that way to me.
Yes, there is such a thing as a "devoiced voiced s".

For example, Canepari gives the pronunciation

['***@Z]

for "houses", where [O] is a special vowel (not relevant
to our topic), and [Z] is a devoiced [z].

Still, there is a difference between a devoiced [Z] and
an [s]. What Canepari calls "devoiced" often is a voiced
sound that is devoiced in its first or second half only.
(He does not tell you explicitly in which half.)
I would call this "half-devoiced".
(You mention this in the text I quote above.)
(When a voiced sound is totally devoiced, there might
still be a fortis-lenis difference to the corresponding
unvoiced sound. I am not sure about whether this applies
to [s]/[z].)

So, I was aware that the phoneme /z/ can be rendered by
a (half-)devoiced phone [Z] in English. I just wanted to know
whether "degrees" ends with a voiced /phonem/ notwithstanding
the fact that it might be rendered by a devoiced phone [Z].
And this has been answered. Thanks for all answers!
Peter Moylan
2017-10-09 05:46:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Jerry Friedman
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Some web pages say,
dI'gris
nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/degrees
, some web pages say,
dI'griz
www.slownictwo.pl/?txt=degrees
. I am just a lowly non-native speaker.
How am I supposed to know which page is right?
Not the Dutch one, when the subject is English pronunciation.
Yes, but how is a non-native speaker supposed to know that the Polish
one is better?
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2017-10-08 20:52:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 14:36:18 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
I was going to agree with "any" till I thought of "dice".
No, as far as I'm concerned, "dice" is not an exception. It ends with
a written vowel, but not a vowel sound, which was what I meant
(perhaps I should have added the word "sound" to what I posted).

And I was also referring to the "s" at the end of the plural of any
(almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel. Perhaps I should have
clarified that too.
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-09 04:02:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 14:36:18 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
Yes. Why do you ask, Stefan?
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
I was going to agree with "any" till I thought of "dice".
No, as far as I'm concerned, "dice" is not an exception. It ends with
a written vowel, but not a vowel sound, which was what I meant
(perhaps I should have added the word "sound" to what I posted).
"Dice" is the plural of "die", and it's formed by adding an "s" sound,
not a "z" sound. I wasn't talking about the spelling.
Post by Ken Blake
And I was also referring to the "s" at the end of the plural of any
(almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel. Perhaps I should have
clarified that too.
If you're talking about the /letter/ s, I agree with you, and I don't
think there are any exceptions.
--
Jerry Friedman
Joy Beeson
2017-10-10 01:43:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 14:36:18 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ken Blake
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
I was going to agree with "any" till I thought of "dice".
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
--
Joy Beeson, U.S.A., mostly central Hoosier,
some Northern Indiana, Upstate New York, Florida, and Hawaii
joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
The above message is a Usenet post.
I don't recall having given anyone permission to use it on a Web site.
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-10 03:17:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 14:36:18 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ken Blake
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
I was going to agree with "any" till I thought of "dice".
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
Richard Tobin
2017-10-10 18:48:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".

"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices". ("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)

Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.

-- Richard
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-11 18:33:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-11 18:53:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
--
athel
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-11 22:04:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one. I just now thought of "bollocks".
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-12 05:23:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one. I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
--
athel
Peter Moylan
2017-10-12 10:42:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one. I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
For the verb, "bollix" has become a common spelling.

"He bollocksed up [or bollixed up] the job."
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-12 14:33:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die."  We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice".  Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb?  Oh, right.  Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths.  Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one.  I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
For the verb, "bollix" has become a common spelling.
"He bollocksed up [or bollixed up] the job."
Thanks.

Another one is "pants", to remove someone's pants (in the American and
possibly also in the British sense) as a prank, (former?) OxbridgE
"debag". The OED has citations back to 1972.

By the way, the OED is not completely convinced that "teethe" comes from
the plural, and etymonline says

"early 15c., probably from an unrecorded Old English verb *teþan, from
toþ "tooth" (from PIE root *dent- "tooth"). Related: Teethed; teething."
--
Jerry Friedman
Mack A. Damia
2017-10-12 14:54:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:33:23 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die."  We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice".  Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb?  Oh, right.  Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths.  Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one.  I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
For the verb, "bollix" has become a common spelling.
"He bollocksed up [or bollixed up] the job."
Thanks.
Another one is "pants", to remove someone's pants (in the American and
possibly also in the British sense) as a prank, (former?) OxbridgE
"debag". The OED has citations back to 1972.
I remember "de-pants" from somewhere, and I think that I recall
"de-bag" meaning the same thing. This is something that older boys
would do to younger ones as a form of ragging.

Those two go back to the 1950s at least.
Post by Jerry Friedman
By the way, the OED is not completely convinced that "teethe" comes from
the plural, and etymonline says
"early 15c., probably from an unrecorded Old English verb *teþan, from
toþ "tooth" (from PIE root *dent- "tooth"). Related: Teethed; teething."
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-12 17:28:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die."  We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice".  Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb?  Oh, right.  Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths.  Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one.  I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
For the verb, "bollix" has become a common spelling.
"He bollocksed up [or bollixed up] the job."
Thanks.
Another one is "pants", to remove someone's pants (in the American and
possibly also in the British sense) as a prank, (former?) OxbridgE
"debag". The OED has citations back to 1972.
At school we used to sing a hymn that started “As pants the hart for
cooling streams when heated in the chase“. I always had difficulty
dissociating that “pants“ from the sort of pants one wears. If you
don't know the hymn that line may not seem very religious, but it
continues “so longs my soul, O God, for Thee“.
Post by Jerry Friedman
By the way, the OED is not completely convinced that "teethe" comes
from the plural, and etymonline says
"early 15c., probably from an unrecorded Old English verb *teþan, from
toþ "tooth" (from PIE root *dent- "tooth"). Related: Teethed; teething."
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-12 17:23:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-6, Athel
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joy Beeson
And we have to spell it "dice" because we'd voice the "s" if we
spelled it "dies".
Which is the plural of the kind in "tool and die works." "Dice" should be
treated as irregular, just like "men" and "children."
And even more like "pence" and "mice".
Even more like "pence" (adding /s/) than like "mice" (vowel change), I'd
say.
Post by Richard Tobin
"Dice" is also used for the singular, and according to the OED has
been since the 14th century, sometimes with plural "dices".
A friend of mine used to say "a dice" because "Never say die." We
referred to them often playing D&D.
Post by Richard Tobin
("Pence"
is similarly sometimes used for the singular in British English,
though it's usually considered wrong.)
So is singular "dice". Usually by me, that is.
Post by Richard Tobin
Presumably the verb would not have come from the plural if it had not
been irregular.
Verb? Oh, right. Dicing, diced carrots, dicers' oaths. Are there
any other verbs converted from plural nouns, regular or irregular?
"teething", in principle the present participle of a verb "teethe",
though one normally only hears the present participle.
Good one. I just now thought of "bollocks".
Can you give an example of the usage? In British English we make a verb
of the singular: "If he does that again I'll give him a bollocking". In
real life, of course, non-metaphorical bollocks normally come two at a
time, so the plural is used much more than the singular. Hitler is said
to have had just one, but two is more usual.
For the verb, "bollix" has become a common spelling.
"He bollocksed up [or bollixed up] the job."
OK, I've come across that, but it's not a usage I'd use myself.
--
athel
Dingbat
2017-10-09 02:06:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
David Kleinecke
2017-10-09 03:23:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I could swear the final 's' in "spices" is voiced.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-09 04:35:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I could swear the final 's' in "spices" is voiced.
Me too.
--
athel
Ken Blake
2017-10-09 18:36:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 06:35:56 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I could swear the final 's' in "spices" is voiced.
Me too.
And me too.
Dingbat
2017-10-09 04:49:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I could swear the final 's' in "spices" is voiced.
I stand corrected; I come from India where it's unvoiced.
Paul Carmichael
2017-10-09 15:17:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I could swear the final 's' in "spices" is voiced.
It is when I say it.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-09 04:36:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and exceptionless.

syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
voiced elsewhere (bags, bagged; referees, refereed)

BrE has a few quasi-regular exceptions like "dreamt" and "spelt." AmE has a few
pairs like that for distinguishing past/pps from adjs. You burned the toast,
the toast is burnt.
David Kleinecke
2017-10-09 17:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and exceptionless.
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
voiced elsewhere (bags, bagged; referees, refereed)
BrE has a few quasi-regular exceptions like "dreamt" and "spelt." AmE has a few
pairs like that for distinguishing past/pps from adjs. You burned the toast,
the toast is burnt.
I pronounce "dreamed" as /dremt/. Also "leaped" as /lept/.
And /wept/ and /likt/. But /speld/. I would say "hit" is
another example (but simplified). I haven't checked my
entire vocabulary.

USE, of course.
b***@aol.com
2017-10-11 18:22:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and
exceptionless.
Not quite so, apparently.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
voiced elsewhere (bags, bagged; referees, refereed)
BrE has a few quasi-regular exceptions like "dreamt" and "spelt." AmE has a few
pairs like that for distinguishing past/pps from adjs. You burned the toast,
the toast is burnt.
Ross
2017-10-11 19:02:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and
exceptionless.
Not quite so, apparently.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
Path, bath and some others (mouth, house, leaf etc) have the
peculiarity of changing a voiceless consonant (f,s,th)
to a voiced one (v,z,dh) in the plural. Once you've done that,
the selection of the plural suffix form follows the regular
rule. However you pronounce "paths" and "baths", I am pretty
sure you will find that the "ths" is either all-voiced or
all-voiceless.
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-11 19:41:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ross
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Ken Blake
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and
exceptionless.
Not quite so, apparently.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
Path, bath and some others (mouth, house, leaf etc) have the
peculiarity of changing a voiceless consonant (f,s,th)
to a voiced one (v,z,dh) in the plural.
AHD has that for path and bath, but not around here!
Post by Ross
Once you've done that,
the selection of the plural suffix form follows the regular
rule. However you pronounce "paths" and "baths", I am pretty
sure you will find that the "ths" is either all-voiced or
all-voiceless.
Ross
2017-10-11 21:22:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Ross
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Ken Blake
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and
exceptionless.
Not quite so, apparently.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
Path, bath and some others (mouth, house, leaf etc) have the
peculiarity of changing a voiceless consonant (f,s,th)
to a voiced one (v,z,dh) in the plural.
AHD has that for path and bath, but not around here!
Obviously I should have mentioned the fact that there is a great
deal of regional and personal variation in exactly which nouns do
this. The total list is probably not more than 20.
Stefan Ram
2017-10-11 22:29:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ross
Path, bath and some others (mouth, house, leaf etc) have the
peculiarity of changing a voiceless consonant (f,s,th)
to a voiced one (v,z,dh) in the plural.
I am also aware of

analysis/analyses
axis/axes
crisis/crises
diagnosis/diagnoses
ellipsis/ellipses
...

, where the final /s/ becomes a voiced /z/ in the plural.
(I am stopping my listing here at the letter "e".)
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-11 19:35:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
The rule for the allomorphy of both the plural/possessive suffix and the past
suffix is extremely simple and
exceptionless.
Not quite so, apparently.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.

For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
Richard Tobin
2017-10-11 19:44:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".

-- Richard
David Kleinecke
2017-10-11 20:12:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
I've heard "hooves" but not "rooves".
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-11 20:22:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
I've heard "hooves" but not "rooves".
Yes. I think that goes for me too. Probably I'd say "hoofs", however,
though I don't often need to talk about them.
--
athel
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2017-10-11 22:29:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 22:22:49 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
I've heard "hooves" but not "rooves".
Yes. I think that goes for me too. Probably I'd say "hoofs", however,
though I don't often need to talk about them.
IME in BrE the plural is mostly spelled "roofs" but some people
pronounce that as "rooves".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Janet
2017-10-12 09:01:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 22:22:49 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the
rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
I've heard "hooves" but not "rooves".
Yes. I think that goes for me too. Probably I'd say "hoofs", however,
though I don't often need to talk about them.
IME in BrE the plural is mostly spelled "roofs" but some people
pronounce that as "rooves".
+1. Same with hoofs.

Janet.
Snidely
2017-10-12 10:05:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
David Kleinecke is guilty of
<af46e8f4-afc6-44aa-8b89-***@googlegroups.com> as of
10/11/2017 1:12:01 PM
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
I've heard "hooves" but not "rooves".
I hear (and may myself switch among) huh-fs, rue-fs, huvs, ruhfs
[rUfs, not rufs, IIHMAIPAR]


/dps
--
"What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it?
Well hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the
springs."
(Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-11 20:23:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Same for me.
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
--
athel
Ross
2017-10-11 21:33:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.

When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /θs/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-11 22:22:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ross
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.
It certainly took a while for me to eliminate when my voice changed.

A somewhat different change is that I sometimes see "yellow-leafed"
instead of "yellow-leaved". A more different change is that I
increasingly hear "houses" with an /s/, not a /z/, in the middle,
unless I'm falling victim to the recency illusion. I don't think
anything has happened to "housing".
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /θs/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter Moylan
2017-10-12 00:35:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /θs/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
The verb here seems to be "bath" when you bath a baby, but "bathe" in
every other situation. I couldn't swear to it, though, because most of
the time we don't use either verb. Instead, we say "I'll give the baby a
bath".
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-12 05:18:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ross
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by b***@aol.com
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)> > >> > voiceless
after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.>
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Richard Tobin
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.
It certainly took a while for me to eliminate when my voice changed.
A somewhat different change is that I sometimes see "yellow-leafed"
instead of "yellow-leaved". A more different change is that I
increasingly hear "houses" with an /s/, not a /z/, in the middle,
unless I'm falling victim to the recency illusion. I don't think
anything has happened to "housing".
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,> I
found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or> the thing
you take a bath in) regularly with /θs/. But the> voiced plural, ending
in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two> well-known public swimming
pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
What do you do with babies? As in "I need to bath the baby"?
--
athel
Ken Blake
2017-10-12 18:42:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 07:18:21 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ross
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by b***@aol.com
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)> > >> > voiceless
after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.>
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Richard Tobin
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.
It certainly took a while for me to eliminate when my voice changed.
A somewhat different change is that I sometimes see "yellow-leafed"
instead of "yellow-leaved". A more different change is that I
increasingly hear "houses" with an /s/, not a /z/, in the middle,
unless I'm falling victim to the recency illusion. I don't think
anything has happened to "housing".
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,> I
found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or> the thing
you take a bath in) regularly with /?s/. But the> voiced plural, ending
in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two> well-known public swimming
pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
What do you do with babies? As in "I need to bath the baby"?
Here in the USA, I would say, "I need to give the baby a bath." I
don't think I've ever heard anyone use "bath" as a verb.
Janet
2017-10-12 09:05:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ross
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the
rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.
It certainly took a while for me to eliminate when my voice changed.
A somewhat different change is that I sometimes see "yellow-leafed"
instead of "yellow-leaved". A more different change is that I
increasingly hear "houses" with an /s/, not a /z/, in the middle,
unless I'm falling victim to the recency illusion. I don't think
anything has happened to "housing".
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /?s/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?

Janet
Cheryl
2017-10-12 10:00:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Ross
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by b***@aol.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
syllabic after a congruent segment (horses, batted)
voiceless after voiceless (walks, walked)
Quid of "path-paths" or "bath-baths" (vs "month-months)?
? All three words end with a voiceless segment, so the plural is /s/.
No in my English. "Baths" and "paths" have voiced endings.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
For the small set of words like knife/knives, the base changes, and the rule holds.
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
-- Richard
The voice-changing pattern is, of course, a historical relic which
is slowly being eliminated.
It certainly took a while for me to eliminate when my voice changed.
A somewhat different change is that I sometimes see "yellow-leafed"
instead of "yellow-leaved". A more different change is that I
increasingly hear "houses" with an /s/, not a /z/, in the middle,
unless I'm falling victim to the recency illusion. I don't think
anything has happened to "housing".
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /?s/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
--
Cheryl
Janet
2017-10-12 13:57:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@mid.individual.net>, ***@med.mun.ca
says...

Jerry said
Post by Cheryl
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.

Janet.
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-12 14:48:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Jerry said
Post by Cheryl
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something? And why no mention of old women?

And back on topic, would you ever use "bathe" transitively?

What Cheryl said, by the way. "Bathe the baby" strikes me as less
colloquial than "give the baby a bath".
--
Jerry Friedman
Jack Campin
2017-10-12 14:51:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
would you ever use "bathe" transitively?
Yes. Particularly in medical/therapeutic contexts - eyes, wounds
and so on.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
mobile 07895 860 060 <http://www.campin.me.uk> Twitter: JackCampin
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-12 17:36:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
says...
Jerry said
Post by Cheryl
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something? And why no mention of old women?
And back on topic, would you ever use "bathe" transitively?
Not in British English, and not intransitively either when referring to
taking or giving a bath: always “bath“. I saw a film in the 1950s
(probably The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit, with Gregory Peck and
Jennifer Jones) in which a character said of another “She never
bathes“. It seemed very strange to my young self, as it would mean she
never went to a swimming pool or the sea, and that didn't seem a very
strong criticism.
Post by Jerry Friedman
What Cheryl said, by the way. "Bathe the baby" strikes me as less
colloquial than "give the baby a bath".
To me it sounds American.
--
athel
Janet
2017-10-12 20:06:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <ornvc6$bat$***@news.albasani.net>, ***@yahoo.com
says...
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
says...
Jerry said
Post by Cheryl
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something?
I knew someone would pick that up (PTD must be sedated). I wish to
replace my witness statement with "In the last half century I have
bathed babies and children thousands of times".
Post by Jerry Friedman
Why old men not women?
My mother kept trying to make me take up nursing by persuading her
Matron crony to give me a vacation job on the longterm-stay wards of a
cottage hospital. Matron thought I was a flibbertigibbert. On day one
she set me to clean up bath and change a difficult old man who had shat
in his pyjamas. After the initial tantrum he enjoyed being bathed by a
16 yr old girl so much, from then on I was stuck with bathing the old
men.
Post by Jerry Friedman
And back on topic, would you ever use "bathe" transitively?
I'd bathe a cut or graze.

Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
What Cheryl said, by the way. "Bathe the baby" strikes me as less
colloquial than "give the baby a bath".
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-12 20:56:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something?
I knew someone would pick that up (PTD must be sedated).
?

This lexical item has been done to death.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2017-10-12 21:13:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:56:07 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
says...
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something?
I knew someone would pick that up (PTD must be sedated).
?
This lexical item has been done to death.
"done to death"? Has it drowned?
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter T. Daniels
2017-10-12 21:25:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:56:07 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
says...
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something?
I knew someone would pick that up (PTD must be sedated).
?
This lexical item has been done to death.
"done to death"? Has it drowned?
? Americanism?
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-12 20:57:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Janet
says...
Jerry said
Post by Cheryl
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think the verb "bath" is pretty rare in this hemidemisphere.
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
"Give the baby a bath". I don't think I've ever bathed a baby in my
life, but being the oldest in a family with a wide spread in ages amogn
the children, I've given a few baths.
I've bathed thousands of babies and children, lots of dogs and quite a
few old men.
Okay, now I'm curious. How did you happen to bath (I hope I'm hearing
your "bathed" with the right vowel) so many children and old men? Were
you a nurse or something?
I knew someone would pick that up (PTD must be sedated). I wish to
replace my witness statement with "In the last half century I have
bathed babies and children thousands of times".
The jury will disregard the witness's previous statement.
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
Why old men not women?
I'd rather you didn't change what I wrote. Or if you do, maybe as a joke,
at least say so.
Post by Janet
My mother kept trying to make me take up nursing by persuading her
Matron crony to give me a vacation job on the longterm-stay wards of a
cottage hospital. Matron thought I was a flibbertigibbert. On day one
she set me to clean up bath and change a difficult old man who had shat
in his pyjamas. After the initial tantrum he enjoyed being bathed by a
16 yr old girl so much, from then on I was stuck with bathing the old
men.
Must remember that.
Post by Janet
Post by Jerry Friedman
And back on topic, would you ever use "bathe" transitively?
I'd bathe a cut or graze.
Thanks for all the answers. It seems you agree with Jack on "bathe".
--
Jerry Friedman
Ken Blake
2017-10-12 18:44:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
Hard work. <g>

But for a more serious answer, see the other reply I just sent in
this thread.
Tony Cooper
2017-10-12 19:54:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Janet
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
Hard work. <g>
Still easier than giving a cat a bath.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Janet
2017-10-12 20:58:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
@gmail.com says...
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Janet
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
Hard work. <g>
Still easier than giving a cat a bath.
We once had a cat who loved water so much she would jump in the bath,
pond and kitchen sink for a little swim.

Janet
RH Draney
2017-10-12 20:57:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Janet
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
Hard work. <g>
Still easier than giving a cat a bath.
That's not so hard...once the cat realizes what's happening, they settle
in and enjoy it...the only drawback is that the fur keeps sticking to
your tongue....r
Mack A. Damia
2017-10-12 21:27:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by RH Draney
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Janet
So how would you describe the bedtime cleansing of children in a large
tub of water?
Hard work. <g>
Still easier than giving a cat a bath.
That's not so hard...once the cat realizes what's happening, they settle
in and enjoy it...the only drawback is that the fur keeps sticking to
your tongue....r
Only if you don't mind ass breath.

Peter Moylan
2017-10-12 00:32:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ross
When I started discussing this with Auckland students in the 1970s,
I found that they pluralized "bath" (as in taking a bath, or
the thing you take a bath in) regularly with /θs/. But the
voiced plural, ending in /ðz/, was still used in the names of two
well-known public swimming pools, both established in 1914.
Exactly the same happens in AusE. The public baths are voiced, but
private baths are not. I think we perceive them as different nouns,
because one is a pool (or a complex of pools) and the other is a tub.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2017-10-12 18:38:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
Yes, but interestingly, I always say, and hear, "roofs" and "hooves"
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-12 18:50:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Richard Tobin
"Roof" and "hoof" can have either "roofs"/"hoofs" or "rooves"/"hooves".
Yes, but interestingly, I always say, and hear, "roofs" and "hooves"
Me too. I think there's less variation on those two in America than in
Britain.
--
Jerry Friedman
Stefan Ram
2017-10-09 05:25:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Ken Blake
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I now compiled some lists from a dictionary.

That dictionary says "spices" is pronounced /spaIsIz/,
so you find "-ces" in the first list. "-ees" ("degrees")
also is in the first list. But, for example, "Francis"
is pronounced with a /s/ at the end in that dictionary.

I already posted those lists on January 4, 2015, but those
lists from 2015 seem to contain at least one error, so I
compiled all lists anew for this 2017 post here.

Endings that are ending in "s" and always are pronounced
with a voiced /z/ at the end:

"-abs", "-ads", "-aes", "-ags", "-ahs", "-als", "-ams",
"-ars", "-aus", "-avs", "-aws", "-ays", "-bas", "-bbs",
"-bes", "-bos", "-bys", "-cas", "-ces", "-dds", "-des",
"-ebs", "-eds", "-ees", "-egs", "-eis", "-els", "-ems",
"-ens", "-eos", "-ers", "-evs", "-ews", "-eys", "-fas",
"-fis", "-ggs", "-gms", "-gns", "-gos", "-has", "-hms",
"-hns", "-hys", "-ibs", "-ids", "-ies", "-igs", "-ils",
"-ims", "-ins", "-ios", "-irs", "-jos", "-kas", "-kis",
"-kos", "-lbs", "-lds", "-les", "-lls", "-lms", "-lns",
"-los", "-mbs", "-mes", "-mns", "-nas", "-nds", "-nes",
"-ngs", "-nns", "-nos", "-oas", "-obs", "-ods", "-oes",
"-ogs", "-ohs", "-ois", "-ols", "-oms", "-ons", "-oos",
"-ors", "-ows", "-oys", "-qis", "-rbs", "-rds", "-res",
"-rgs", "-rls", "-rns", "-rrs", "-sas", "-ses", "-sms",
"-sos", "-srs", "-tas", "-tls", "-tys", "-uas", "-ubs",
"-uds", "-ugs", "-uls", "-ums", "-uns", "-uos", "-urs",
"-uys", "-ves", "-vos", "-was", "-wds", "-wes", "-wis",
"-wls", "-wns", "-wos", "-xes", "-yls", "-yms", "-yos",
"-yrs", "-zas", "-zes", "-zis", and "-zos".

Endings that are ending in "s" and always are pronounced
with a unvoiced /s/ at the end:

"-acs", "-afs", "-aks", "-aos", "-aps", "-ass", "-ats",
"-bts", "-chs", "-cis", "-cks", "-cts", "-cus", "-ecs",
"-efs", "-eks", "-eps", "-ess", "-ffs", "-fts", "-gus",
"-hts", "-ics", "-iks", "-ips", "-iss", "-ius", "-kes",
"-khs", "-lfs", "-lks", "-lps", "-lts", "-lus", "-mps",
"-nks", "-ocs", "-ofs", "-oks", "-ops", "-oss", "-phs",
"-pps", "-pts", "-pus", "-rcs", "-rfs", "-rks", "-rps",
"-scs", "-sis", "-sks", "-sps", "-sts", "-tts", "-tus",
"-ufs", "-uis", "-uss", "-wks", "-wts", "-xas", "-xts",
"-xus", "-yps", and "-yss".

Endings that are ending in "s" and are sometimes
pronounced with a voiced /z/ and sometimes with an
unvoiced /s/:

"-ais", "-ans", "-bis", "-bus", "-cos", "-das", "-dis",
"-dos", "-dus", "-eas", "-ets", "-eus", "-fes", "-gas",
"-ges", "-ghs", "-gis", "-hes", "-his", "-hos", "-hus",
"-ias", "-ifs", "-its", "-las", "-lis", "-mas", "-mis",
"-mos", "-mus", "-ncs", "-nis", "-nts", "-nus", "-ots",
"-ous", "-pas", "-pes", "-pis", "-pos", "-ras", "-ris",
"-rms", "-ros", "-rts", "-rus", "-sus", "-tes", "-ths",
"-tis", "-tos", "-ues", "-ups", "-uts", "-vas", "-vis",
"-xis", and "-yes".
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-09 15:05:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Dingbat
Post by Ken Blake
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
I now compiled some lists from a dictionary.
...

You want "I have now compiled" or "I just compiled" or "I compiled" or
other possibilities, but not "I now compiled".
Post by Stefan Ram
Endings that are ending in "s"
"...that end in 's'"
Post by Stefan Ram
and are sometimes
pronounced with a voiced /z/ and sometimes with an
"-ais", "-ans", "-bis", "-bus", "-cos", "-das", "-dis",
"-dos", "-dus", "-eas", "-ets", "-eus", "-fes", "-gas",
"-ges", "-ghs", "-gis", "-hes", "-his", "-hos", "-hus",
"-ias", "-ifs", "-its", "-las", "-lis", "-mas", "-mis",
"-mos", "-mus", "-ncs", "-nis", "-nts", "-nus", "-ots",
"-ous", "-pas", "-pes", "-pis", "-pos", "-ras", "-ris",
"-rms", "-ros", "-rts", "-rus", "-sus", "-tes", "-ths",
"-tis", "-tos", "-ues", "-ups", "-uts", "-vas", "-vis",
"-xis", and "-yes".
What makes the differences for most or all the ones with a vowel before
"s" is whether they're singular (/s/) or plural (/z/). E.g., "rebus"
versus "zebus" (plural of "zebu").

I can't imagine what word ends in "-nts" or "-rts" with a /z/ at the
end, or in "-rms/ with an /s/ at the end.
--
Jerry Friedman
Stefan Ram
2017-10-09 17:15:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jerry Friedman
You want "I have now compiled" or "I just compiled" or "I compiled" or
other possibilities, but not "I now compiled".
...
Post by Jerry Friedman
"...that end in 's'"
Thank you!
Post by Jerry Friedman
I can't imagine what word ends in "-nts" or "-rts" with a /z/ at the
"croissants", "divertissements", "restaurants"

"coverts", "rapports"

(according to a certain dictionary)

In all the cases above, the dictionary reports that the "t"
is not pronounced.
Post by Jerry Friedman
end, or in "-rms/ with an /s/ at the end.
There was a single compound word ending in "arms"
(in the sense of weapons), where an /s/ was reported,
while other words ending with "arms" (in the sense of
weapons) had a /z/. So this might have been a glitch
(an errror in the dictionary).
Peter Moylan
2017-10-10 08:15:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Jerry Friedman
I can't imagine what word ends in "-nts" or "-rts" with a /z/ at the
"croissants", "divertissements", "restaurants"
The "t" and the "s" are both silent if I'm speaking French. If I'm
speaking English, then all three of those words end in [ts]. No /z/ in
sight.
Post by Stefan Ram
"coverts", "rapports"
(according to a certain dictionary)
In all the cases above, the dictionary reports that the "t"
is not pronounced.
I agree with your dictionary in the case of "rapports". I've never had
occasion to say "coverts" so I don't know how it's pronounced.

For the rest, it sounds as if your dictionary was not written by an
English speaker.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2017-10-10 13:12:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Jerry Friedman
I can't imagine what word ends in "-nts" or "-rts" with a /z/ at the
   "croissants", "divertissements", "restaurants"
The "t" and the "s" are both silent if I'm speaking French. If I'm
speaking English, then all three of those words end in [ts]. No /z/ in
sight.
Same here, though I may never have said or heard "divertissements".
Post by Peter Moylan
   "coverts", "rapports"
   (according to a certain dictionary)
   In all the cases above, the dictionary reports that the "t"
   is not pronounced.
I agree with your dictionary in the case of "rapports".
Me too, to the extent that the plural exists.
Post by Peter Moylan
I've never had
occasion to say "coverts" so I don't know how it's pronounced.
I have, referring to certain feathers, and I pronounce the "t". So does
the OED. M-w says it's "also" pronounced with a silent "t".
Post by Peter Moylan
For the rest, it sounds as if your dictionary was not written by an
English speaker.
I feel that somewhere I may have vaguely heard of a pronunciation of
"restaurant" with a silent "t" but an English /n/.
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-10 16:02:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Jerry Friedman
I can't imagine what word ends in "-nts" or "-rts" with a /z/ at the
"croissants", "divertissements", "restaurants"
The "t" and the "s" are both silent if I'm speaking French. If I'm
speaking English, then all three of those words end in [ts]. No /z/ in
sight.
Agreed on all points.
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Stefan Ram
"coverts", "rapports"
(according to a certain dictionary)
In all the cases above, the dictionary reports that the "t"
is not pronounced.
I agree with your dictionary in the case of "rapports".
Likewise
Post by Peter Moylan
I've never had occasion to say "coverts" so I don't know how it's pronounced.
Likewise
Post by Peter Moylan
For the rest, it sounds as if your dictionary was not written by an
English speaker.
--
athel
Peter Moylan
2017-10-09 05:48:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dingbat
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
How about ending with a silent "e". The ending of "spices" is unvoiced.
Yes, but in the plural the "e" is no longer silent, therefore the "s" is
voiced.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-10-09 04:37:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Stefan Ram
Is the sound at the end of the plural "degrees" voiced
or voice-less?
Voiced.
I think the sound at the end of the plural of any (almost any?) noun
that ends in "e" is voiced.
It's probably also true that the sound at the end of the plural of
any (almost any?) noun that ends in any vowel is voiced.
That's simpler than, for some reason, treating "degrees" as a special
case (which it isn't).
--
athel
Loading...