Why do people put apostrophes in plural words?
"Cant" is pronounced differently to "can't" in quite a bit of England... Cant is a short a (as in pan), Can't is a long a (as in Mars).Because there is no difference in pronunciation among, for example, friends, friend's and friends'.
It can be argued that the apostrophe is utterly useless in 99% of its applications. Would any of us mispronounce cant, wheres, theyd, didnt, or youll if the apostrophe were missing?
We don't use that word in American English. I'd wager that more than 99% of our people have no idea what it means."Cant" is pronounced differently to "can't" in quite a bit of England... Cant is a short a (as in pan), Can't is a long a (as in Mars).
Well sure. I make a living as a writer and/or editor, so I feel the same way. But I also recognize the fact that the apostrophe causes most Americans more grief than service.I'm all for the correct use of apostrophes.
Yet there are no apostrophes in the spoken language, and nobody ever misunderstands those homophones.Apostrophes help differentiate possessive, plural and conjunctions. The "s" in Friends is plural, friend's denotes singular possessive, friends' is plural possessive. . . .
No, it's a verb... or to be precise: a contraction of a verb with an adverb.. . . .while can't is a conjunction.
They mean three different things in speech too. Somehow we seem to distinguish homophones.The first three sound the same in speech, but in reading these are three different things.
That's 'cos you don't speak the Queen's English - or BBC English - or Received Pronunciation etc.We don't use that word in American English. I'd wager that more than 99% of our people have no idea what it means.
And by the way, the few of us in America who actually use the noun "cant" pronounce it the same as "can't.
Studies have shown that when reading we can also quickly understand words that have had their letters jumbled, as long as the first and last letters are as in the correct spelling. So quickly, in fact, that it might not actually slow down your reading!They mean three different things in speech too. Somehow we seem to distinguish homophones.
I have seen no reports on the results of these tests when the words include apostrophes.Studies have shown that when reading we can also quickly understand words that have had their letters jumbled, as long as the first and last letters are as in the correct spelling. So quickly, in fact, that it might not actually slow down your reading!
"Sarkus said:
"Cant" is pronounced differently to "can't" in quite a bit of England... Cant is a short a (as in pan), Can't is a long a (as in Mars)."
We don't use that word in American English. I'd wager that more than 99% of our people have no idea what it means.
And by the way, the few of us in America who actually use the noun "cant" pronounce it the same as "can't."Well sure. I make a living as a writer and/or editor, so I feel the same way. But I also recognize the fact that the apostrophe causes most Americans more grief than service.Yet there are no apostrophes in the spoken language, and nobody ever misunderstands those homophones.No, it's a verb... or to be precise: a contraction of a verb with an adverb.They mean three different things in speech too. Somehow we seem to distinguish homophones.
Short 'a'.And now I'm wondering how the kahnt people pronounce cantilever.
Specifically, it's a deliberately modified version of a normal language used by a group to thwart understanding by outsiders. The slang of criminals, with numerous words having special meanings, is a perfect example, and one whose purpose has been largely sabotaged by movies about criminals.I know cant . . . . as a private language.
The vast majority of Americans use the "short A" pronunciation (e.g.,"ant") in all of those words. Only in a few communities with roots going back beyond the 19th century, such as Boston, will you hear what the rest of us regard as the British pronunciation--or in families with roots in those communities.But, the dictionary does list the pronunciation as kant/kahnt. It's the same with some people pronouncing ant & aunt differently. I'm a can't, cant, ant, aunt all sounding the same kind of guy. And now I'm wondering how the kahnt people pronounce cantilever.
You have to grow up with it. Like "real" languages, it's much easier to learn in childhood.I have known adults in the US who seem unable to understand Pig Latin even after it is explained.
The most common reason that people from other regions find New Yorkers difficult to understand is that they speak much faster than most of us. This is especially true of Southerners, who generally speak more slowly than most other Americans.In the 1950s and now some find most Southerners much easier to understand than most people in or from Bahsten or Noo Yawk.
"Zoology" looks like it was derived from "zoo," so we pronounce it the same way. Ironically, it's the other way around: "zoo" was derived from "zoology": an abbreviation for "zoological park." Well-educated people are more likely to pronounce it correctly: zoh - ology. Especially scientists, and of course all zoologists.Why do people say coo-operate & zoo-ology?
Why do people say coo-operate & zoo-ology?
< >
Wow, I've never heard that one.Today a TV news reporter said "Charges are not being filed against her because she is coo-operating with police".