6 ms·
It's true that we do alter our speech to provide context clues, it is also true that without them we're _still_ capable of piecing them together. If someone s
by akira2501 8y ago
It's true that we do alter our speech to provide context clues, it is also true that without them we're _still_ capable of piecing them together.
If someone says in a unnaturally drawn out way "I like peanut butter sandwhiches" then I will have no problem detecting the situation and then re-parsing it correctly.
- behringer 8y agoThe space is irrelevant. Consider the sentences: The black bird ate seeds. The blackbird flew at mach 3. Your brain thinks of these two words completely differently and it's only through conscious effort that you think of them together. They are different words even though they sound and are spelled the same, regardless of the space. A better example I think is "bear feet" vs "bare feet"
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago"Blackbird" refers to several species of actual bird, not just the plane. "The black bird ate seeds" and "The blackbird ate seeds" are both reasonable sentences, and they do potentially sound different.
- xioxox 8y agoI'm not convinced. It takes effort for me to break apart blackbird into two separate words in my head, as they are so commonly found together. When speaking "black bird" I would insert a long pause between the two and emphasise the "b" on bird to show that I'm not talking about a "blackbird".
- qlm 8y agoThe difference for me (maybe this is regional?) is that for “blackbird” the stress is on “black” whereas for “black bird” the stress is on “bird”.
- stan_rogers 8y agoYes, it's mostly about the stress.