tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post8460086786417940094..comments2024-02-19T07:51:46.118-05:00Comments on Throw Grammar from the Train: Duct tape/duck tape, one more timeJanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03173219179480606941noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-4099988205975221682015-06-28T10:19:15.295-04:002015-06-28T10:19:15.295-04:00Quack tape ought to be the easy fix, only because ...Quack tape ought to be the easy fix, only because nobody cares. How's that? No, only kidding! I believe though that in today's world one ought to be a better pronouncer. Let's take' deduct'. Can you pronounce it 'deduck' ? No, I think not. IRMC! So. Duct tape. Repeat it.<br />I always tell kids to say 'yes' and 'no' instead of u hum or uh uh. It's important to enunciate once in a while, isn't it? I'll just go ahead and answer that w/ 'yes', considering the possibilities of answers to that question.<br />As of now both duck and duct may be acceptable, regardless of whether you write it or say it. Thanks.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04297769408260281110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-67968613908352654912013-07-07T21:21:32.250-04:002013-07-07T21:21:32.250-04:00So, Sue, you want us to use duck because it doesn&...So, Sue, you want us to use duck because it doesn't stretch and melt? I feel this is a quack recommendation.Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-77788841095146651012013-07-06T17:18:16.249-04:002013-07-06T17:18:16.249-04:00Although duct is a common usage, it is completely ...Although duct is a common usage, it is completely illogical. This is the worst possible thing to use on ducts. It stretches and it melts.Sue Dunhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04386142309332609673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-38320928438854785722013-07-01T21:06:14.339-04:002013-07-01T21:06:14.339-04:00So, John, your pronunciation is [dʌktʰejp], non-ge...So, John, your pronunciation is [dʌktʰejp], non-geminate k and non-geminate t. Right?Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-78625340668750223652013-07-01T20:43:10.404-04:002013-07-01T20:43:10.404-04:00For me there is no phonetic gemination, though I t...For me there is no phonetic gemination, though I think of the phrase semantically as <i>duct tape</i>.John Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452247999156925669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-57305498339990577982013-07-01T16:53:10.072-04:002013-07-01T16:53:10.072-04:00Let's try not to get hung up on terminology. ...Let's try not to get hung up on terminology. Although I would call the double [t] in <i>duct tape</i> a "geminate t", since both "t"s are original, I would not call that "gemination", since that is when you start with a single consonant and wind up with it doubled. But if you want to call that "gemination", I don't care (now that I know what you mean).Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-66481672329067392882013-07-01T14:02:13.064-04:002013-07-01T14:02:13.064-04:00It's the T that's geminated in duct tape. ...It's the T that's geminated in <i>duct tape</i>. It's a question of whether you're saying /dʌkteɪp/ or /dʌkt:eɪp/.Faldonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12873736640907864834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-59294343428103726842013-07-01T13:24:01.338-04:002013-07-01T13:24:01.338-04:00Uh, looking back, I see that referring to the chan...Uh, looking back, I see that referring to the change as "gemination" is essentially my fault, since I said "duck" might be pronounced with a "lengthened [k]". I should have said "long [k]" or "double [k]", I guess.Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-11456377134451705052013-07-01T13:17:33.712-04:002013-07-01T13:17:33.712-04:00A change [kt t] to [kk t] is not a gemination -- i...A change [kt t] to [kk t] is not a gemination -- it's a progressive place assimilation that happens to produce two like consonants. For comparison, here are two cases of regressive place assimilation producing like consonants, in common pronunciations: "practical" with [tt] and "Atkins" with [kk].<br /><br />Progressive place assimilation is not common in English casual speech. "Hypnotize" with [pm] for [pn] is an instance.Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-48519099840949198132013-07-01T11:04:13.657-04:002013-07-01T11:04:13.657-04:00BTW, English's lack of gemination as a standar...BTW, English's lack of gemination as a standard feature could be used to argue both that the correct <i>duct tape</i> has degenerated to the common solecism <i>duck tape</i> and that the correct <i>duck tape</i> has been hyper-corrected to <i>duct tape</i>.Faldonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12873736640907864834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-34690444601955650902013-07-01T11:01:18.984-04:002013-07-01T11:01:18.984-04:00I would say that gemination is not, typically, a r...I would say that gemination is not, typically, a recognized feature of most dialects of English but then IANAL, so who am I to judge?Faldonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12873736640907864834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-63338334571678417692013-06-30T00:53:39.430-04:002013-06-30T00:53:39.430-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-72928578812948308632013-06-30T00:52:24.788-04:002013-06-30T00:52:24.788-04:00I thought of posting a rule that would change [ktt...I thought of posting a rule that would change [ktt] into [kt], thus "duct" comes to be "duck", but I was afraid that someone would point out that such a rule wouldn't really say why.<br /><br />And I also started wondering whether [ktt] might instead be changing to [kkt], so they don't actually sound the same, after all. It's just that there is no good way to spell "duck" pronounced with a lengthened [k].Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-9427972053848776102013-06-29T22:59:31.964-04:002013-06-29T22:59:31.964-04:00Hey, Greg, you're the linguist here. I don'...Hey, Greg, you're the linguist here. I don't really think you need me (or anyone else) to tell you the answer. Janhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03173219179480606941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8811866763970314328.post-3928736064218814112013-06-29T19:33:24.285-04:002013-06-29T19:33:24.285-04:00But why do "duct tape" and "duck ta...But why do "duct tape" and "duck tape" sound the same?Gregory Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293280236115306205noreply@blogger.com