benhall.1 wrote:Nanohedron wrote:Likewise with "nuance", "lunar", "super", and "stupid"
Well, that's difficult, isn't it? Ours would be "nyoo-once" (hard 'o' in that second syllable), "loo-nuh" (not "lyoonar), "soo-puh" and "styoopid". In other words, neither "lunar" nor "super" has the "yoo" sound, except that "super" does in the mouths of aristocrats, as with "lute". But lunar is "loo-nuh" for everybody, as far as I know.
I'm allowing for exceptions on both sides of the Pond; my theory is only a general one that suggests that in English, there's a tendency to de-palatalize the U after coronal consonants, and that this tendency has a greater hold in New World English.
As to UK pronunciations of "lunar" and "super", I can only admit my ignorance and plead my reliance on memory and YouTube. I know for certain that I've heard a palatalized U with "lunar", and yesterday I checked YouTube for Brit pronunciations of "super", and in the very first I came upon, the U was palatalized. Not strongly so; it was almost fugitive, but it was there.
I must be being fed the sounds of posher speakers, I suppose.
benhall.1 wrote:I have to admit, this thread is the first time I have come across the phrase "coronal consonant". I still have no idea what it means. It's OK ... I'll look it up ...
To repeat, coronal consonants are those that involve the tip of the tongue: N, L, S, T, and so on. You find the distinction especially prominent in Arabic, where it affects pronunciation of the definite article. It was only in this thread, upon noting where de-palatalization of the U seems to regularly occur in American English, that I put two and two together; coronal consonants might have more relevance in English pronunciation than may previously have been considered. But again, I doubt I'm covering new ground.
"If you take music out of this world, you will have nothing but a ball of fire." - Balochi musician