Re: Bot. pronunciation
- To: i*@Rt66.com
- Subject: Re: Bot. pronunciation
- From: t*@Lanl.GOV (Tom Tadfor Little)
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 14:36:56 -0600
Debbie writes
:I get Tom's point about the fact that Pseudocorus is a combination of
:Pseudo and Acorus--but given some of the other comments I wonder why the
:pronunciation of Acorus is fixed as "ACK" rather than "AHK".
It's probably not fixed. (Although I don't recall hearing Acorus
pronounced "AHK-or-us", I can't sy I've had a whole lot of opportunities
to listen to people talking about Acorus.) This is the tomayto/tomahto
thing. My remarks were directed at the placement of the stress, not
whether to use a "broad" or "flat" A-sound.
:If either
:could be acceptable wouldn't the "sue-duh-KOR-us" be an acceptable
:pronunciation?
No, that wouldn't follow. That would be like saying that since some
say to-MAY-to and some say to-MAH-to, one might as well say TOM-uh-to.
You could do that just to be silly, but not as a serious alternative
pronunciation.
The point is that most people who say "SUE-duh-KOR-us" do so because
they misunderstand the etymology of the word. Among people who
pronounce it that way, the misspelling "pseudocorus" is fairly common.
I think the misspelling gives away the source of the misunderstanding.
BTW, I don't correct anyone's pronunciation of botanical names in
conversation; it's not an easy matter to correctly pronounce words
in a foreign language that we encounter mostly in reading. There's no
point in making people feel self-conscious or defensive. (The result
would just be less talk about species, which would be a shame!) But,
of course, if the subject comes up...
;)
===============================================================
Tom Tadfor Little tlittle@lanl.gov -or- telp@Rt66.com
technical writer/editor Los Alamos National Laboratory
---------------------------------------------------------------
Telperion Productions http://www.rt66.com/~telp/
===============================================================
