THE KING'S ENGLISH [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] Sia,—It
is much to be hoped that some of the B.B.C.'s broad- casters who need them should read and profit by Mr. Rat- cliffe's criticisms in this week's Spectator. Why should we have inflicted upon us the Cockney aou " for long " o " and the Cockney " ah-ee " for long " a " ?
Then there is the extraordinary pronunciation of " diffuh- coon " for " difficult " and " vee-ukkle " for the word " vehicle." And why drop the final " r " of such words as " rear " and " clear " ? Whatever excuse there may be for dropping final " r " before wordS beginning with a consonant, surely there is none for doing so where the following word begins with a vowel. A " cleah road " is bad enough, surely a " cleah opening " is unpardonable.
May I draw Mr. Ratcliffe's attention to his apparent misuse of the word `: accent " in his last paragraph ? , In his third paragraph he speaks of " pronunciation, accent and stress," showing that he properly distinguishes between " accent " and " pronunciation." But when later he speaks of " con- demned accents, metropolitan or provincial," surely the word " accents " should be " pronunciations."
During my own lifetime I have seen the gradual substitution of " accent " for " pronunciation." " Accent " is what is accentuated. " Pronunciation " is what is pronounced. The only reason I know for this misuse of " accent " instead of " pronunciation " is laziness of speakers and writers in using the short, incorrect word for the correct long one. I think I may claim Mr. Ratcliffe as on the side of correctness in this respect too.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
