Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Pronouncing C as S or K - Why?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gatsby



Joined: 09 Feb 2007

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:44 am    Post subject: Pronouncing C as S or K - Why? Reply with quote

It's fascinating what you can learn, or at least notice, teaching English as a second language. For example, why is the letter "C" sometimes pronounced like an "S" and sometimes like a "K"?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, reread the first paragraph.

My theory is that it has something to do with ancient Latin. When I was a kid, people generally pronounced the C in Latin words as an S. But now I am hearing some people pronounce it as a K.

For example, "Cicero" was sisero, but I have heard it more recently pronounced kikero.

But maybe I was misinformed. I always thought Scylla (as in Scylla and Charybdis) was silla, but I have been told it should be pronounced skyla. But I always assumed Charybdis was pronounced karibdis.

So I am wondering whether the inconsistency originated with ancient Latin, or whether the inconsistency arose in the inconsistent versions of pronunciation of ancient Latins at different points in history, or in different regions. Perhaps the Church had a different style of pronunciation from, say, England? After all, who could have known for sure how the ancient Greeks pronounced stuff?

While we're at it, why would you need the letter C if you already have S and K?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
losing_touch



Joined: 26 Jun 2008
Location: Ulsan - I think!

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have a set of data in front of me and am too lazy to think too much about this. However, think about the endings of the following words:

bets, begs, bridges

Say the words out loud. There are three different endings there. There fact of the matter is that English orthography does not represent the sounds of the language very well. In this case it is assimilation rules at work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bogey666



Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

English pronounciation has nothing to do with Latin. In fact, we have had to adopt certain Latin words with their pronounciation from Latin.. and Latin words aren't subject to typical english rules, like plurals (.e.g datum/data, etc)

Compared to most langages English is pretty effed up... because in many/most, you speak as you write.

Only in english can the same sound be written 2 or many more different ways.

Any other languages where the word sound for "no" can be written as "no" or "know
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yingwenlaoshi



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Pronouncing C as S or K - Why? Reply with quote

Gatsby wrote:
It's fascinating what you can learn, or at least notice, teaching English as a second language. For example, why is the letter "C" sometimes pronounced like an "S" and sometimes like a "K"?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, reread the first paragraph.

My theory is that it has something to do with ancient Latin. When I was a kid, people generally pronounced the C in Latin words as an S. But now I am hearing some people pronounce it as a K.

For example, "Cicero" was sisero, but I have heard it more recently pronounced kikero.

But maybe I was misinformed. I always thought Scylla (as in Scylla and Charybdis) was silla, but I have been told it should be pronounced skyla. But I always assumed Charybdis was pronounced karibdis.

So I am wondering whether the inconsistency originated with ancient Latin, or whether the inconsistency arose in the inconsistent versions of pronunciation of ancient Latins at different points in history, or in different regions. Perhaps the Church had a different style of pronunciation from, say, England? After all, who could have known for sure how the ancient Greeks pronounced stuff?

While we're at it, why would you need the letter C if you already have S and K?


I'd look it up, but I'm a little tired right now. There's so much involved with the history of English and all the languages that have influenced and changed it throughout time that it'd probably take a while to explain how/why spelling and the sounds associated with it are what they are today.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yingwenlaoshi



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

losing_touch wrote:
I don't have a set of data in front of me and am too lazy to think too much about this. However, think about the endings of the following words:

bets, begs, bridges

Say the words out loud. There are three different endings there. There fact of the matter is that English orthography does not represent the sounds of the language very well. In this case it is assimilation rules at work.


I think that "begs" has the same sound as the one in "bets" unless maybe followed by vowel sounds. Even then...

The theory with /s/ and /z/ following voiceless and voiced consonants respectively has its flaws.


Last edited by yingwenlaoshi on Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cheonmunka



Joined: 04 Jun 2004

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a lot about mutation, the change of sounds. Also a lot to do with borrowing.
A lot of words that came originally from Latin (2000 years ago) eventually changed vowels after the initial consonant. So, something like 'caseus' with a hard c became 'caesi,' 'ceasi' then 'ciese' to 'cheese.' So this dipthongization altered the initial consonant. Another example, 'casere' with a hard c was the original to our now softly introduced 'caesar.'

The Germanic language (Old English) had some hard sounds. 'Beswican sceolden.' It gave us 'cild' now 'child.' It had 'god,' meaning 'good.'
But for the modern hard c that we use most of that comes from the Danes and Anglos of the early middle ages into Britain. A lot of sch's and sc's like scab, scrape and school. They used a lot the final __k endings that we may now spell as ___ck. (I don't know why we spell sky and not scy though.) The Anglos also did borrow from Christianity, so a lot of Latin words there, school for one, calendar as another. (I wonder what the pronunciation of 'circle' was like?)
So, Latin introduced through them and adding more Latin onto the Latin words already in the country, words like candle, cleric, cook, cap ...

But then, the Franks then came along with their soft c words like 'ceap' (cheap.) French may have reinforced different types of c pronunciation.
(And what they had done to Latin would have pleased the ancestors of Gaul.)

Britain had a Germanic language. Well, it had Celtic too. (Apart from some place names Celtic's not a root of English.) Then it had Latin, a big enough influence onto OE. Then it had Scandanavian Anglo stuff. Then it had French. Then it had a movement for English emphasizing good ole English, without the latest French stuff, which brought back some of the old words and ways of compounding them, but noone especially Shakespeare denied the borrowed words.
Employing all the above languages and borrowings the first dictionary of the English language was made, and here we are, a hodgepodge of hard and soft - with heaps of synonyms and a lot of variety in our sounds.


Last edited by Cheonmunka on Sat Sep 27, 2008 3:36 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ajgeddes



Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Location: Yongsan

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yingwenlaoshi wrote:
losing_touch wrote:
I don't have a set of data in front of me and am too lazy to think too much about this. However, think about the endings of the following words:

bets, begs, bridges

Say the words out loud. There are three different endings there. There fact of the matter is that English orthography does not represent the sounds of the language very well. In this case it is assimilation rules at work.


I think that "begs" has the same sound as the one in "bets" unless maybe followed by vowel sounds. Even then...

The theory with /s/ and /z/ following voiceless and voiced consonants respectively has its flaws.


Begs and bets have different final sounds. Very strange that you can't hear it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
yingwenlaoshi



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: ... location, location!

PostPosted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ajgeddes wrote:
yingwenlaoshi wrote:
losing_touch wrote:
I don't have a set of data in front of me and am too lazy to think too much about this. However, think about the endings of the following words:

bets, begs, bridges

Say the words out loud. There are three different endings there. There fact of the matter is that English orthography does not represent the sounds of the language very well. In this case it is assimilation rules at work.


I think that "begs" has the same sound as the one in "bets" unless maybe followed by vowel sounds. Even then...

The theory with /s/ and /z/ following voiceless and voiced consonants respectively has its flaws.


Begs and bets have different final sounds. Very strange that you can't hear it.


It depends. Didn't you read what I wrote? I know the theory of the "s" in "begs" having a /z/ sound, but try it in certain sentences and when the word is by itself.

Say the following fast:

"He begs to the people."

and

"He bets to the dealer."

(I don't feel much, if any, difference in the "s")

And this:

"He begs a lot."

"He bets a lot."

(There's a difference here - the "s" in "begs" is, or is closer to, a /z/ sound)