--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@...>
wrote:
>
> Well, actually, what I've noticed is that, although the letter
> "j" is pronounced normally [dZ] in English, if it is in a
> foreign word or name, such as "Beijing" or "Maharaja", it is
> always pronounced [Z], as though the word is French, even
> though the source language pronounces it more or less as in
> English, approximately [dZ].
Yes, I've noticed that habit too. 'Ahmedinejad' always
seems to get this treatment, and often even picks up a
/k/ as well, as /ak.m&.di.n&.Zad/. A velar fricative is
often assumed proper for any foreign 'h', but especially
for one in the syllabic coda as is the case here, which
is then likely to be substituted with /k/.
> I don't know why so many Anglophones believe that if a word is
> foreign, it must be pronounced according to French rules of
> pronunciation.
I don't think that it's French pronunciation per se that
they're aiming for, at least not here in the U.S. Rather
it's just a vague concept and set of internalized rules
gathered from limited observation about what's proper to
foreign speech.
Similarly a rule seems to apply to the letters 'i' and 'u',
which many Anglophones think must always be /i/ and /u/
when in foreign words. The Arabic name 'Malik' is popular
with African-Americans here in the U.S., who almost always
pronounce it /m&.lik/, stressing the second syllable, and
the reporter Linda Ellerbee's annoying pronunciation of the
Indian word 'dalit' to sound the same as English 'delete',
including the stress on the second syllable, also comes to
mind. The common use of /pHun.dZæb/ for 'Punjab' is also
pretty amusing.
In Canada the French example might well be the main source
of some of these rules, but I tend to think it is Spanish
here in the U.S.
David