356) Using French accents on words on French origin that have been fully naturalised in English - in particular, a circumflex on the 'o' in 'role
( Read more... )
It certainly does sound onomatopoeic, doesn't it? Hmm, I just had this image flashing in my mind of Much as a comic-strip character, with a Zorro-type mask, as the Sherwood Avenger, with his arm out and a cape flapping behind him, and a spikey action bubble in bright colours with the word 'ZOOM!' in it. Do you ever get moments like this? :)
I'd say "zoom" was too informal for an academic context - if that's what you mean by a "formal context". Not just the word itself, but the idea/sense of your example itself!
Various google sources suggest it's late 18th century, all describe it as informal. I'd rather get that info from a proper dictionary, but there're none around - stoopid science labs!
The OED only gives citations for it from the very end of the 19th century, not 18th. It does describe it as colloquial, of onomatopoeic origin, and it seems the earlier meaning was closer to "buzz" than "travel quickly", with the current usual sense being transferred i.e. move as though making a zooming noise!
I've always done that because growing up, that was the way I always saw it in books. I know it doesn't have to be and I think I'm not so particular about it anymore.
One of the things I don't like is "blue" cheese instead of "bleu". Do you see labels with "bree" cheese?
:) I suppose the process of naturalisation of a word in another language is quite contentious really - especially when it's in the early days. It drives me mad when I hear someone pronounce 'chorizo' (in Spanish pronunciation cho-ree-tho) as cho-ri-tso (or variations thereon), but I don't think it's really reasonable to insist on native pronunciation!
In school, we had the odd teacher using the circumflew in 'role', but most didn't - I suppose it just never rubbed off on me.
Using French accents on words on French origin that have been fully naturalised in English - in particular, a circumflex on the 'o' in 'role'.
Oh, I'm guilty of that! Wait until you see my website where the word occurs frequently... For me it's a matter of correctness - as someone else commented, it was how it always used to be written, and for me, the dropping of the accent is just laziness. It's like adjectives such as sacréd, blesséd or doggéd, which always used to have an acute accent on the last e, so you could distinguish them from verbs, e.g. blessed and dogged.
These words are not foreign imports, but there seems to be a policy nowadays that English uses no accents, whereas I would argue that it always has - who would dispute the use of "Nöel" on a Christmas card, for example?
I don't feel I'm being pretentious in using the original forms, I just feel that I'm not dumbing down, but I acknowledge that that in itself could be deemed as pretentious!
In my opinion, "zoom" is onomatopoeic, even if it doesn't represent sound
I don't see any reason for the accent any more because of its pronunciation
It's all about common use, isn't it? If enough people do a thing in the same way, then it becomes right, even it was wrong to begin with. So dropping the wrtten accent in words like role and cafe will soon be the norm, and at some point in the future it will seem bizarre that we ever wrote the words any other way.
Can you imagine, for example how strange "hotel" would look with an accent? But it came from French and has a circumflex on the "o" so it must have been used in English at some point...
Oh, and yes, there will be the odd lovely picture or two for you *g*
It's all about common use, isn't it? If enough people do a thing in the same way, then it becomes right, even it was wrong to begin with.
Well yes, indeed. It's interesting how spelling can take such a foothold in some ways. And it is quite difficult to predict as well. One would expect the accent on 'role' (which is not pronounced) to disappear before the accent on 'cafe' (which is pronounced), but I am not sure if that is what is happening. But of course I don't work on English, and someone who works on the written modern language would be much better placed than I am to comment on the trends currently being observed.
And I'm very much looking forward to those pictures!
I'm not sure I can ever remember thinking about it. I guess the accent on cafe is slightly useful, and the one on role less so. When I'm writing I vaguely remember that role should maybe have an accent, even though I'm generally more used to it without, but never made a positive decision to remember it, or omit it.
In general, you're probably right. Although I'm not positive. Would it be worth keeping the accent optional? That looks less tidy, because it's not consistent, yet allows people to use it if there might be any confusion, but not if they don't want to. But I wouldn't have thought you'd come out as a proponent of changing the language simply because the new way was simpler and just as good :)
Now, I won't have it said that I'm a hardline prescriptivist - I'm incredibly fickle in my linguistic pet hates! :)
It's natural enough that the accent should drop out considering that, as you say, there's no difference in the quality of vowel anyway. And I shouldn't really be angry about writing being conservative, given that this assumption is such a major part of the work I do! Hmm...
OOI, what confusion could arise over 'role' whereby an accent would be needed? :)
I'm incredibly fickle in my linguistic pet hates! :)
:)
OOI, what confusion could arise over 'role' whereby an accent would be needed? :)
Nothing sprang to mind -- I meant it might for some words (eg. if you want to tell people whether to pronounce cafe as "cafay" or "caff"), but can't think why it'd be needed for role. (I can't think why it'd be needed in french either, for that matter, but it could well be necessary and I just don't know :))
:) My French pronunciation is far from perfect[1], but I believe 'o' with a circumflex has a different quality to 'o' with no circumflex. The circumflex is supposed to denote a sound that goes up and then down, IYSWIM... but it's more complicated that that IME :)
[1] Though good enough to make a French person speak to me in French - which I learnt was in fact undesirable if you want an easy ride while in Paris. They like it if you try, so the best strategy if you don't want to speak much French is to pronounce it terribly so that they pity you and speak English :)
Comments 18
Reply
Reply
Various google sources suggest it's late 18th century, all describe it as informal. I'd rather get that info from a proper dictionary, but there're none around - stoopid science labs!
Reply
Reply
Reply
I do like the implication that you have to say 'Zooooom!' while you're doing it :) But then I never did get round to growing up!
Reply
I've always done that because growing up, that was the way I always saw it in books. I know it doesn't have to be and I think I'm not so particular about it anymore.
One of the things I don't like is "blue" cheese instead of "bleu". Do you see labels with "bree" cheese?
Reply
In school, we had the odd teacher using the circumflew in 'role', but most didn't - I suppose it just never rubbed off on me.
Reply
Oh, I'm guilty of that! Wait until you see my website where the word occurs frequently... For me it's a matter of correctness - as someone else commented, it was how it always used to be written, and for me, the dropping of the accent is just laziness. It's like adjectives such as sacréd, blesséd or doggéd, which always used to have an acute accent on the last e, so you could distinguish them from verbs, e.g. blessed and dogged.
These words are not foreign imports, but there seems to be a policy nowadays that English uses no accents, whereas I would argue that it always has - who would dispute the use of "Nöel" on a Christmas card, for example?
I don't feel I'm being pretentious in using the original forms, I just feel that I'm not dumbing down, but I acknowledge that that in itself could be deemed as pretentious!
In my opinion, "zoom" is onomatopoeic, even if it doesn't represent sound
Reply
Reply
It's all about common use, isn't it? If enough people do a thing in the same way, then it becomes right, even it was wrong to begin with.
So dropping the wrtten accent in words like role and cafe will soon be the norm, and at some point in the future it will seem bizarre that we ever wrote the words any other way.
Can you imagine, for example how strange "hotel" would look with an accent? But it came from French and has a circumflex on the "o" so it must have been used in English at some point...
Oh, and yes, there will be the odd lovely picture or two for you *g*
Reply
Well yes, indeed. It's interesting how spelling can take such a foothold in some ways. And it is quite difficult to predict as well. One would expect the accent on 'role' (which is not pronounced) to disappear before the accent on 'cafe' (which is pronounced), but I am not sure if that is what is happening. But of course I don't work on English, and someone who works on the written modern language would be much better placed than I am to comment on the trends currently being observed.
And I'm very much looking forward to those pictures!
Reply
I'm not sure I can ever remember thinking about it. I guess the accent on cafe is slightly useful, and the one on role less so. When I'm writing I vaguely remember that role should maybe have an accent, even though I'm generally more used to it without, but never made a positive decision to remember it, or omit it.
In general, you're probably right. Although I'm not positive. Would it be worth keeping the accent optional? That looks less tidy, because it's not consistent, yet allows people to use it if there might be any confusion, but not if they don't want to. But I wouldn't have thought you'd come out as a proponent of changing the language simply because the new way was simpler and just as good :)
Reply
It's natural enough that the accent should drop out considering that, as you say, there's no difference in the quality of vowel anyway. And I shouldn't really be angry about writing being conservative, given that this assumption is such a major part of the work I do! Hmm...
OOI, what confusion could arise over 'role' whereby an accent would be needed? :)
Reply
:)
OOI, what confusion could arise over 'role' whereby an accent would be needed? :)
Nothing sprang to mind -- I meant it might for some words (eg. if you want to tell people whether to pronounce cafe as "cafay" or "caff"), but can't think why it'd be needed for role. (I can't think why it'd be needed in french either, for that matter, but it could well be necessary and I just don't know :))
Reply
[1] Though good enough to make a French person speak to me in French - which I learnt was in fact undesirable if you want an easy ride while in Paris. They like it if you try, so the best strategy if you don't want to speak much French is to pronounce it terribly so that they pity you and speak English :)
Reply
Leave a comment