Reading a new English word as a foreigner is super frustrating because you never know how to pronounce that.
Yes sure unanimous is not ‘un-animous’, it’s ‘you-nanimous’. Makes total sense.
Don’t even get me started on the dozen different ways to pronounce ‘ough’.
With words starting with “un” you can figure out pronunciation by removing the “un” and see if the rest of the word is it’s own word which means the opposite. “animous” is not a word so you would use the long “u” sound in “unanimous”. Same for uniform or university. But not unironic or unintentional.
Yes that may be the reason why that difference exists.
The usefulness of that tip is limited when encountering new words for the first time though.
If I don’t know unanimous, chances are I don’t know if animous exists either.
Edit: Also there is understand, which starts with un- although there is no ‘derstand’.
Explanation: That’s both union-ized, for part of a union, or un-ionized, for not ionized
That said, that’s a really good way to describe the difference. If you’re a native speaker, you’ve got really good insight (your native language has a lot of blind spots, where you know what is right, but not why), and if you’re not, then your English is really good!
Thanks. I am a native English speaker. I just hate how inconsistent it is so I try to think up as many rules as I can to apply some kind of logic to it.
The French heavily curate their language too, which probably contributes to it’s reliability and overall clarity. There are official words with official pronunciations, gendering, etc. No willy-nilly adding words from colloquialisms or slang like in English.
The problem of English is not so much colloquialisms or slang.
It’s a history of being conquered over and over and mixing the various languages together, throwing in a major vowel shift and then some scholars decided to further change the spelling of some words, just because.
Let me just say, I’m not necessarily blaming anyone for the mess that is English.
I merely point out that there is often no clearly recognizable correlation between spelling and pronunciation, which can easily trip up non-native speakers (ant often natives too).
Like how the hell are you supposed to know how to pronounce “preface”. It’s obviously pre-face and it’s before everything else so the prefix pre makes so much sense. No one ever uses that word in spoken conversation either.
Reading a new English word as a foreigner is super frustrating because you never know how to pronounce that.
Yes sure unanimous is not ‘un-animous’, it’s ‘you-nanimous’. Makes total sense.
Don’t even get me started on the dozen different ways to pronounce ‘ough’.
With words starting with “un” you can figure out pronunciation by removing the “un” and see if the rest of the word is it’s own word which means the opposite. “animous” is not a word so you would use the long “u” sound in “unanimous”. Same for uniform or university. But not unironic or unintentional.
Yes that may be the reason why that difference exists.
The usefulness of that tip is limited when encountering new words for the first time though.
If I don’t know unanimous, chances are I don’t know if animous exists either.
Edit: Also there is understand, which starts with un- although there is no ‘derstand’.
Most radiology teachers want to be unionized.
Explanation: That’s both union-ized, for part of a union, or un-ionized, for not ionized
That said, that’s a really good way to describe the difference. If you’re a native speaker, you’ve got really good insight (your native language has a lot of blind spots, where you know what is right, but not why), and if you’re not, then your English is really good!
Thanks. I am a native English speaker. I just hate how inconsistent it is so I try to think up as many rules as I can to apply some kind of logic to it.
That’s very uncommon for native speakers, so good job! You’re probably a good person for language learners to be around :)
Yeah, have you met French?
Mais oui.
Once you understand the rules, I find French pronunciation generally more reliable than English.
The French heavily curate their language too, which probably contributes to it’s reliability and overall clarity. There are official words with official pronunciations, gendering, etc. No willy-nilly adding words from colloquialisms or slang like in English.
The problem of English is not so much colloquialisms or slang.
It’s a history of being conquered over and over and mixing the various languages together, throwing in a major vowel shift and then some scholars decided to further change the spelling of some words, just because.
Let me just say, I’m not necessarily blaming anyone for the mess that is English.
I merely point out that there is often no clearly recognizable correlation between spelling and pronunciation, which can easily trip up non-native speakers (ant often natives too).
Like how the hell are you supposed to know how to pronounce “preface”. It’s obviously pre-face and it’s before everything else so the prefix pre makes so much sense. No one ever uses that word in spoken conversation either.