Thread: Stupid English for Russians...

Anyone learning English as a second language has my deepest sympathy...

1. The bandage was wound around the wound.
2. The farm was used to produce produce.
3. The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.
4. He could lead if he would get the lead out.
5. The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
6. Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was the time to present the present.
7. A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.
8. When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.
9. I did not object to the object.
10. The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
11 There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
12. They were too close to the door to close it.
13. The buck does funny things when the does are present.
14. A seamstress and a sewer fell down a sewer line.
15. To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
16. The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
17. After a number of injections my jaw got number.
18. After seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.
19. I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
20. How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

We have noses that run... and feet that smell. When the stars are out, they are visible.. .when the lights are out, they are invisible.

How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are the opposites?

You have to marvel at the lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down.
You fill in a form by filling it out, and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

Nice one!
One comment though, about a slim chance and a fat chance. They are not strictly speaking the same, because you say "fat chance" sarcastically, i.e. meaning "slim chance". Just like saying "Fantastic(!)" whilst meaning "Shit" doesn't make fantastic a synonym of shit.

What's the Russian translation for "slim chance" and "fat chance" please?

Ни малейшего шанса, без шансов (разг.).

That, and defying most other languages on the planet, English keeps its incredible archaic spelling. I wonder if the literacy level would be any better if we had spelling that actually made sense.

Originally Posted by Pravit

That, and defying most other languages on the planet, English keeps its incredible archaic spelling. I wonder if the literacy level would be any better if we had spelling that actually made sense.

I thought it was pronunciation which was archaic. The spelling is more or less close to all European Roman languages.

The spelling is close to other languages but we don't pronounce them the same as when they were written. German word "Knecht" means knight and it is pronounced as it is written: Kn -echt. However our word 'Knight" is prononunce "Nait" although back in the day it used to actually be pronounced "Kneecht."

But besides that, how could we be having "archaic pronunciation"? If that is the way we are currently pronouncing it, then it couldn't be archaic. You'd have to have a time machine to see how we pronounce it 500 years later!

Originally Posted by Zeus

Originally Posted by Pravit

That, and defying most other languages on the planet, English keeps its incredible archaic spelling. I wonder if the literacy level would be any better if we had spelling that actually made sense.

I thought it was pronunciation which was archaic. The spelling is more or less close to all European Roman languages.

Чего?

Originally Posted by Zeus

Originally Posted by Pravit

That, and defying most other languages on the planet, English keeps its incredible archaic spelling. I wonder if the literacy level would be any better if we had spelling that actually made sense.

I thought it was pronunciation which was archaic. The spelling is more or less close to all European Roman languages.

You mean Germanic languages, don't you?

Originally Posted by Pravit

The spelling is close to other languages but we don't pronounce them the same as when they were written. German word "Knecht" means knight and it is pronounced as it is written: Kn -echt. However our word 'Knight" is prononunce "Nait" although back in the day it used to actually be pronounced "Kneecht."

That's exactly what I'm talking about. The question is - what's 'wrong', pronunciation or spelling?

But besides that, how could we be having "archaic pronunciation"? If that is the way we are currently pronouncing it, then it couldn't be archaic.

If so, then your first sentence ("English keeps its incredible archaic spelling") is incorrect too If that is the way you are currently writing it, then it couldn't be archaic.

As for Roman/Germanic, well, yes, I could say 'any European language with Latin-based alphabet'. All these languages have much closer spelling and pronunciation; even bizzare French has more defined rules.

For example, the ending -tion is common for the most of the languages (information, operation etc.) And everywhere it is pronounced like -s-ee-on, -ts-ee-on etc. Only English features [-shn]. This leads to conclusion that something wrong happened with pronunciation (or didn't happened despite the circumstances - that's why I called it 'archaic').

There are greater problems with dyslexia in Britain than there are in countries where the spelling is mor regular and phonetic, eg Italian.

I read somewhere that part of the problem with the discrepenct between the way the words are written and spoken is because if we take a word from a roman alphabet language we will not change the spelling.

Also in Britain there has always been a push and pull realationship between the anglo-saxon and the roman aspects of hte language. we alsmost have a two tier language where nearly every world of Anglo-Saxon origin has a 'Latin' equivilent. eg dog/canine. The Latin is considered more educated but is often more difficult to spell.

There is often a prestige to having a surname which is pronounced very diffrently to its spelling; e.g. Cholmondeley-Chumley. Although these are often old-fashioned pronounciation of french words. eg Beecham for Beachamps.

i hope this is interesting

"Cholmondeley/Chumley"

What was that place name in Britain, with something like 30 letters, but pronounced in two syllables?

BTW, look at this: ward (German/Old Norse), warden (Old North French), guardian (Old South French), sentinel (Latin), keeper (Old English) etc. etc

the name Featherstonehaugh is pronounced 'Fanshaw', which is always fun.

Woolfhardisworthy = Woolsey

Auchinlech = Aflek

Menzies = Mingis

and, of course, the clincher:

Compton = Luxury Yacht

You know, until about 1998 I thought Leicester was "Lie-chester."

Ok this is a test, the nearest town to me is
Loughborough
Can any Russian/American/Ozzy/Kiwi pronouced it correctly?

If it's an irregular pronunciation, an Englishman wouldn't even know how to pronounce it. I'm half-English and I'd just guess "Low-bruh".

@Americans: I think, while we're on the subject, I'll tell you what's bugging me as well:
Stop pronouncing the -shire at the end of county-names as sh-eye-r. It's either -shur or -sheer (london accent).
Don't rhyme glasgow with cow.
Don't say Birming-haem. Birmingum will do.

That'll be all.

Originally Posted by Rose

Ok this is a test, the nearest town to me is
Loughborough
Can any Russian/American/Ozzy/Kiwi pronouced it correctly?

Easy peasy - "lockbra" (here 'a' is the schwa). Where is it, by the way? Scotland? Ireland? IMHO someone with a thick Scottish accent might actually say "lochbra" where ch is like the ch of 'Bach' in German (or the 'khhhhkhhkhhhhh' of Liverpool)

Originally Posted by joysof

Menzies = Mingis

This is because it comes from Scots, a form of English spoken in Lowland Scotland (some say it's a language related to English ) and it has its own spelling rules. Another example is Dalziel, pronounced 'Dale'.

Originally Posted by VendingMachine

Originally Posted by Rose

Ok this is a test, the nearest town to me is
Loughborough
Can any Russian/American/Ozzy/Kiwi pronouced it correctly?

Easy peasy - "lockbra" (here 'a' is the schwa). Where is it, by the way? Scotland? Ireland? IMHO someone with a thick Scottish accent might actually say "lochbra" where ch is like the ch of 'Bach' in German (or the 'khhhhkhhkhhhhh' of Liverpool)

Nope, it's in England, and it's pronounced Luff-Bara ( лафбара )

This is because it comes from Scots, a form of English spoken in Lowland Scotland (some say it's a language related to English ) and it has its own spelling rules. Another example is Dalziel, pronounced 'Dale'.

The spelling/ pronounciation was originally Gaelic, and it's 'Dee-El' (диеп) rather than 'Dale'.

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by VendingMachine

Originally Posted by Rose

Ok this is a test, the nearest town to me is
Loughborough
Can any Russian/American/Ozzy/Kiwi pronouced it correctly?

Easy peasy - "lockbra" (here 'a' is the schwa). Where is it, by the way? Scotland? Ireland? IMHO someone with a thick Scottish accent might actually say "lochbra" where ch is like the ch of 'Bach' in German (or the 'khhhhkhhkhhhhh' of Liverpool)

Nope, it's in England, and it's pronounced Luff-Bara ( лафбара )

Luff-bara? You can't be serious. I can believe that Featherstonehaugh is pronounced Fanshaw, but I'll never believe that the o in borough can be sounded as the a in 'car'. Did you mean 'burra' by any chance? (Is it in Leicestershire? If so, shouldn't it be Looff-burra in the local vernacular? ).

While we're on the -ough theme, which is the correct pronunciation of those O'Loughlin/MacLoughlin/etc surnames? I've heard 'olufflin' but 'maglocklin'.

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by VendingMachine

This is because it comes from Scots, a form of English spoken in Lowland Scotland (some say it's a language related to English ) and it has its own spelling rules. Another example is Dalziel, pronounced 'Dale'.

The spelling/ pronounciation was originally Gaelic, and it's 'Dee-El' (диеп) rather than 'Dale'.

If you watch that police drama Dalziel & Pascoe, they do indeed say Dee-el, but I would tend to think that it is only the characters who speak with the northen accents that do (some say things like mee-ak, mee-at, etc. so I thought it was the same phenomenon, you know). The announcer on BBC Prime, for instance, always says "...another episode of Dale & Pascoe". I've asked a few Brits and they rhyme it with Dale.

According to those few Gaelic coursebooks I have the letter z isn't actually used in Gaelic. The books say that the Gaelic alphabet has only 18 letters (if we don't count the vowels with ` as extra letters). However, in one of the docs from the Scoats Leid Quarum site (unfortunately I can't quote from it at the moment) they say that z was often used in Scots to represent ng and other sounds.