5 ms·

Because of categorical perception (as defined on the https://dictionary.apa.org/categorical-perception https://dictionary.apa.org/categorical-perception page),

Because of categorical perception (as defined on the https://dictionary.apa.org/categorical-perception https://dictionary.apa.org/categorical-perception page), there's no general agreement on the "correct" way to pronounce a non-English name within English communication to a mostly English speaking audience. Some people argue that the right approach is to always use the closest equivalents within the English phonemic inventory. In this view, it's incorrect to suddenly shift English speech into the phonemic inventory of a name's origin. Listeners, on average, simply can't and won't hear the name consistently, and thus communication is less effective. The opposite view is that this is just another example of cultural arrogance, and it's best to shift out of the English phonemic inventory whenever that's reasonably possible. (For example, in this view, the shift should occur when a name is part of news coverage, and the speaker had an opportunity to learn the phonemes of the original language in advance.) This isn't specific to English: it's the general question of whether a speaker should always stay within the phonemic inventory of the communication's main language.

jan_Inkepa 5y ago
I can't think of any examples off-hand right now, but I remember reading an analysis of English where it was talking about using only a subset of its phonetic inventory/phonotactics for foreign words (a bunch being reserved for native words). So even in cases that the English has all the sounds for a word it may not always render them because of the 'foreign word' register. English-speakers like to struggle with issues of pronounciation of non-native words. Some other languages are just hardcore "naturalize the hell out of foreign words". I personally don't see much of a moral component in English approach. Though I understand that many people are super big on it as indicating respect, for me, I'd never be so arrogant as to judge people of random language X too harshly for only getting a rough approximation of my name, or mapping it to the nearest common name in their language.
tdeck 5y ago
I see this a lot in with Americans having Polish surnames (or other Slavic). People typically pronounce theirs somewhere on a spectrum between the original and a monolingual english-speaker's attempt to make sense of the letters, so you just have to wait for them to say it. Example: Susan Wojcicki, whose name is apparently pronounced "woh-jisky" but I think in Polish (not a speaker) would be more like "voy-chitsky". This site shows a whole variety of other American pronunciations: https://www.pronouncenames.com/pronounce/wojcicki https://www.pronouncenames.com/pronounce/wojcicki
- pchm 5y ago
  C in Polish is pronounced as ts/tz and 'ck' is an interesting case in Polish-American surnames: American pronunciation turns 'ck' into 'kk' and Polish speakers will often have a hard time recognizing the original spelling. Listening to audio mentioning Susan Wojcicki, I could never figure out the spelling of her name... BTW, Polish pronunciation for Wójcicki (notice the 'ó') is Vooy-chits-ki
- ithinkso 5y ago
  Susan Wojcicki - polish people would immediately assume it's written online and would correct the surname to Wójcicki because it makes much more sense grammatically speaking and I think that's what it was originally before being anglicized. Note that 'ó' in not a form of 'o' but of 'u' so subsequent pronunciations with 'o' sounds a bit weird for us polish speakers
renewiltord 5y ago
This is very reasonable. But I wonder if there is a word (in any language) for the pointless pleasure of saying a foreign word in the foreign language pronunciation. And for the pleasure of observing someone mistakenly do so. How many Pauls build a Les Paul? For my part, even my two syllable first name can be hard for Anglophones, though they are usually very eager to learn how to say it (people are usually very kind). I Postel principle the shit out of it, anyway.
- neltnerb 5y ago
  Cosmopolitan aesthetics would be the root of the phenomena I imagine, if that word doesn't still apply. I know it was a discussion for many decades about whether a piece of music should be in the original language or the translation. Everyone settled on the original, so we all sing with absolutely atrocious accents in foreign languages as best we can. I feel like this whole area is a giant minefield for actors now, switching accents for roles is extremely normal. If that is suddenly interpreted as signaling a lack of respect for the real accent of the people they are portraying it makes an awful lot of everything harder.
  - flyinghamster 5y ago
    > I know it was a discussion for many decades about whether an piece of music should be in the original language or the translation. Everyone settled on the original, so we all sing with absolutely atrocious accents in foreign languages as best we can. I can relate to that. Pre-pandemic, I was singing in a community chorus, where we routinely had to sing in languages we don't necessarily speak. Typically, the director would coach us. We had an actual German in the audience one time when we did some Christmas pieces in German, and he told us that we sang the words correctly, but it was still odd to hear German with a Chicago accent. :) I've heard of one top-level group bringing in a professor to coach Church Slavonic when they did Rachmaninoff's _Vespers_. Since I don't even speak modern Russian, I have no idea how well they did it, but their musicianship was outstanding.
    - neltnerb 5y ago
gryson 5y ago
The article brings up categorical perception when it says one shouldn't assume they are hearing sounds in another language correctly, since our brains will map those sounds to the nearest English equivalent. What the article is really addressing is how different orthographic romanization systems map to English sounds. It's not advocating (as far as I can tell) that English speakers attempt to produce non-English sounds, which is, as you say, a difficult issue and probably not realistic without phonetic training.
- flyinghamster 5y ago
  > The article brings up categorical perception when it says one shouldn't assume they are hearing sounds in another language correctly, since our brains will map those sounds to the nearest English equivalent. I've noticed a similar thing with Spanish (my second language). I can kind-of read Portuguese as a side effect, but if I try to listen to spoken Portuguese I find it completely incomprehensible. My auditory circuits just aren't wired for it.
rlpb 5y ago
Even within English there are different accents. I'm British. If I meet an American "Annie" then do I put on a faux American accent while saying her name? Or do I just say "Annie" with a British accent? If it's allowed or even expected that I shift "Annie" into my accent, why not a non-English name? What about European names that have English equivalents but are pronounced differently in European languages? My own name is foreign. Native English speakers cannot pronounce one of the vowels in it, and if they try, they end up using what is to me a different vowel entirely (imagine someone saying "Dive" instead of "Dave"). I gave up when I was about six, and am quite happy for people to use a common, roughly similar English name for me instead. In fact I prefer it, since then I don't have to hear it being mangled constantly.
- neltnerb 5y ago
  I personally think it's entirely fine to switch between accents to try to match the locals, but I get the argument that it's offensive. I think it's unfortunate that this is the perception because I really really really really like phonetics. I'm a singer, this is our bread and butter. It's frustrating that doing my best to sing with an Australian accent is surely entirely unacceptable in 2021, even if it's an Australian composer and the rhyming scheme makes no sense in an American accent. At least for some reason it's perfectly fine to use a British accent at all times, even if it's a horrible accent. We almost always sing with a "British accent" by default because of particular ways it improves the understandability of the words when sung. We tend to only use an "American accent" (and even then, which one right?) when singing Gospel music. The rules are a little strange and clearly asymmetric in the sense that adopting accents that have historically been over-emphasized or glorified or straight up were the accents of conquering empires is fine while the reverse is not. This is a reasonable guideline, but I admit it feels hollow as someone who simply wants to sing as best I can.
  - jan_Inkepa 5y ago
    Good points. Yeah; it's possibly ironic that a lot of efforts/values in this direction have a strong indirect effect of enforcing the status quo and the cultural norms of the prevailing power. ("It's always ok to wear jeans" is my shorthand). I remember being surprised at Hugh Laurie's blues recordings. He's the person I can think of off-hand that went all-out on accent while singing with his mother tongue. OTOH if you go all out and sing in another language it's regarded as ok try to try render things more exactly (But most people make lots of mistakes that native speakers pick up on and so the audience may not enjoy the aesthetic outcome. It's super hard!)

jan_Inkepa 5y ago

I can't think of any examples off-hand right now, but I remember reading an analysis of English where it was talking about using only a subset of its phonetic inventory/phonotactics for foreign words (a bunch being reserved for native words). So even in cases that the English has all the sounds for a word it may not always render them because of the 'foreign word' register. English-speakers like to struggle with issues of pronounciation of non-native words. Some other languages are just hardcore "naturalize the hell out of foreign words". I personally don't see much of a moral component in English approach. Though I understand that many people are super big on it as indicating respect, for me, I'd never be so arrogant as to judge people of random language X too harshly for only getting a rough approximation of my name, or mapping it to the nearest common name in their language.

tdeck 5y ago

I see this a lot in with Americans having Polish surnames (or other Slavic). People typically pronounce theirs somewhere on a spectrum between the original and a monolingual english-speaker's attempt to make sense of the letters, so you just have to wait for them to say it. Example: Susan Wojcicki, whose name is apparently pronounced "woh-jisky" but I think in Polish (not a speaker) would be more like "voy-chitsky". This site shows a whole variety of other American pronunciations: https://www.pronouncenames.com/pronounce/wojcicki https://www.pronouncenames.com/pronounce/wojcicki

pchm 5y ago
C in Polish is pronounced as ts/tz and 'ck' is an interesting case in Polish-American surnames: American pronunciation turns 'ck' into 'kk' and Polish speakers will often have a hard time recognizing the original spelling. Listening to audio mentioning Susan Wojcicki, I could never figure out the spelling of her name... BTW, Polish pronunciation for Wójcicki (notice the 'ó') is Vooy-chits-ki
ithinkso 5y ago
Susan Wojcicki - polish people would immediately assume it's written online and would correct the surname to Wójcicki because it makes much more sense grammatically speaking and I think that's what it was originally before being anglicized. Note that 'ó' in not a form of 'o' but of 'u' so subsequent pronunciations with 'o' sounds a bit weird for us polish speakers

renewiltord 5y ago

This is very reasonable. But I wonder if there is a word (in any language) for the pointless pleasure of saying a foreign word in the foreign language pronunciation. And for the pleasure of observing someone mistakenly do so. How many Pauls build a Les Paul? For my part, even my two syllable first name can be hard for Anglophones, though they are usually very eager to learn how to say it (people are usually very kind). I Postel principle the shit out of it, anyway.

neltnerb 5y ago
Cosmopolitan aesthetics would be the root of the phenomena I imagine, if that word doesn't still apply. I know it was a discussion for many decades about whether a piece of music should be in the original language or the translation. Everyone settled on the original, so we all sing with absolutely atrocious accents in foreign languages as best we can. I feel like this whole area is a giant minefield for actors now, switching accents for roles is extremely normal. If that is suddenly interpreted as signaling a lack of respect for the real accent of the people they are portraying it makes an awful lot of everything harder.
- flyinghamster 5y ago
  > I know it was a discussion for many decades about whether an piece of music should be in the original language or the translation. Everyone settled on the original, so we all sing with absolutely atrocious accents in foreign languages as best we can. I can relate to that. Pre-pandemic, I was singing in a community chorus, where we routinely had to sing in languages we don't necessarily speak. Typically, the director would coach us. We had an actual German in the audience one time when we did some Christmas pieces in German, and he told us that we sang the words correctly, but it was still odd to hear German with a Chicago accent. :) I've heard of one top-level group bringing in a professor to coach Church Slavonic when they did Rachmaninoff's _Vespers_. Since I don't even speak modern Russian, I have no idea how well they did it, but their musicianship was outstanding.
  - neltnerb 5y ago

gryson 5y ago

The article brings up categorical perception when it says one shouldn't assume they are hearing sounds in another language correctly, since our brains will map those sounds to the nearest English equivalent. What the article is really addressing is how different orthographic romanization systems map to English sounds. It's not advocating (as far as I can tell) that English speakers attempt to produce non-English sounds, which is, as you say, a difficult issue and probably not realistic without phonetic training.

flyinghamster 5y ago
> The article brings up categorical perception when it says one shouldn't assume they are hearing sounds in another language correctly, since our brains will map those sounds to the nearest English equivalent. I've noticed a similar thing with Spanish (my second language). I can kind-of read Portuguese as a side effect, but if I try to listen to spoken Portuguese I find it completely incomprehensible. My auditory circuits just aren't wired for it.

rlpb 5y ago

Even within English there are different accents. I'm British. If I meet an American "Annie" then do I put on a faux American accent while saying her name? Or do I just say "Annie" with a British accent? If it's allowed or even expected that I shift "Annie" into my accent, why not a non-English name? What about European names that have English equivalents but are pronounced differently in European languages? My own name is foreign. Native English speakers cannot pronounce one of the vowels in it, and if they try, they end up using what is to me a different vowel entirely (imagine someone saying "Dive" instead of "Dave"). I gave up when I was about six, and am quite happy for people to use a common, roughly similar English name for me instead. In fact I prefer it, since then I don't have to hear it being mangled constantly.

neltnerb 5y ago
I personally think it's entirely fine to switch between accents to try to match the locals, but I get the argument that it's offensive. I think it's unfortunate that this is the perception because I really really really really like phonetics. I'm a singer, this is our bread and butter. It's frustrating that doing my best to sing with an Australian accent is surely entirely unacceptable in 2021, even if it's an Australian composer and the rhyming scheme makes no sense in an American accent. At least for some reason it's perfectly fine to use a British accent at all times, even if it's a horrible accent. We almost always sing with a "British accent" by default because of particular ways it improves the understandability of the words when sung. We tend to only use an "American accent" (and even then, which one right?) when singing Gospel music. The rules are a little strange and clearly asymmetric in the sense that adopting accents that have historically been over-emphasized or glorified or straight up were the accents of conquering empires is fine while the reverse is not. This is a reasonable guideline, but I admit it feels hollow as someone who simply wants to sing as best I can.
- jan_Inkepa 5y ago
  Good points. Yeah; it's possibly ironic that a lot of efforts/values in this direction have a strong indirect effect of enforcing the status quo and the cultural norms of the prevailing power. ("It's always ok to wear jeans" is my shorthand). I remember being surprised at Hugh Laurie's blues recordings. He's the person I can think of off-hand that went all-out on accent while singing with his mother tongue. OTOH if you go all out and sing in another language it's regarded as ok try to try render things more exactly (But most people make lots of mistakes that native speakers pick up on and so the audience may not enjoy the aesthetic outcome. It's super hard!)