The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-24-2004, 12:29 PM
KarmaComa KarmaComa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Naive: umlaut on the i, or no?

I put an umlaut on the i in naive. Do you? Is this generally accepted in English, or is it really just a French thing for diphthongs?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 02-24-2004, 01:02 PM
kellner kellner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarmaComa
I put an umlaut on the i in naive.
When you use a diaeresis (those dots) to prevent two letters from being parsed as a diphthong (or transliteration of an umlaut in languages where that is applicable) it is called a trema. An umlaut changes the pronunciation of the individual letter by moving the location of articulation to the front (and "i" as in "naive" can't have an umlaut because it is already as far in front as possible.)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-24-2004, 01:09 PM
GorillaMan GorillaMan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
From the GorillaMan Style Guide

If you use a foriegn letter, which the trema suggests (thanks Kellner), then put the word in italics. If you're using it as an anglicised word, then a regular I suffices.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-24-2004, 01:31 PM
Scarlett67 Scarlett67 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Middle of Nowhere, WI
Posts: 10,667
Naive appears in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, both with and without the diaeresis; the form without it is listed first and thus generally preferred. I would say that the diaeresis is accepted as a variant in English.

As a copyeditor, I am willing to use either version. Generally, I consider it a style decision and follow the author's preference unless I have instructions from the client to the contrary.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-24-2004, 01:52 PM
KarmaComa KarmaComa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellner
When you use a diaeresis (those dots) to prevent two letters from being parsed as a diphthong (or transliteration of an umlaut in languages where that is applicable) it is called a trema. An umlaut changes the pronunciation of the individual letter by moving the location of articulation to the front (and "i" as in "naive" can't have an umlaut because it is already as far in front as possible.)
Thanks kellner! I know that I was misusing both umlaut and diphthong, but what fun would it be to describe abuse of language without abusing language?


I guess I'll just do the old search/replace for na\" \i ve... I thought it was standard but it seems it isn't, and is probably considered a bit pretentious.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-24-2004, 03:25 PM
Cliffy Cliffy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
My understanding is that the diaresis is accepted in english, although it's been falling out of use in the last several decades, and this trend has accelerated with the move to cold type. The disresis is also appropriate in words like co÷peration or co÷rdinate to indicate that both "o"'s are pronounced. Otherwise you'd think you should pronounce cooperate as <koop-er-ate>.

--Cliffy
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-24-2004, 03:47 PM
GorillaMan GorillaMan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
"co÷peration"???? .....that'll come as a surprise to the Co-operative Bank
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-24-2004, 10:30 PM
rkts rkts is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
"Co÷peration" and "co÷rdinate" are silly and pretentious. Until they start teaching kids to spell that way in kindergarten, it will only add confusion to the language and do nothing for clarity except in the conceits of a few self-absorbed intellectuals.

Naive has been so thoroughly assimilated into English that in my opinion the diaeresis can be dropped. But I wouldn't consider it pretentious if I saw it with the diaeresis.

The masculine form, na´f, as in faux-na´f, is, however, so obviously still a borrowing from French that the diaeresis is absolutely necessary, in my opinion, even though the dictionary permits it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-24-2004, 10:32 PM
rkts rkts is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
That is, even though the dictionary permits it without the diaeresis.

You know what I mean.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-24-2004, 10:48 PM
Excalibre Excalibre is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffy
My understanding is that the diaresis is accepted in english, although it's been falling out of use in the last several decades, and this trend has accelerated with the move to cold type. The disresis is also appropriate in words like co÷peration or co÷rdinate to indicate that both "o"'s are pronounced. Otherwise you'd think you should pronounce cooperate as <koop-er-ate>.

--Cliffy
Co÷perate? ReŰlect? I've only EVER seen those in the New Yorker - was that common usage at one point? Seems silly to me . . . but na´ve very reasonably may, in my opinion. I tend to use it, I think, but maybe I'm just a pretentious bastard. I prefer it; after all, do you ever see nÚ (or nÚe) without the accent? A lot of French words are normally written with their accents in English; it's always a soupšon, never a soupcon. Why should na´ve be any different?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-24-2004, 11:53 PM
rkts rkts is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
do you ever see nÚ (or nÚe) without the accent? A lot of French words are normally written with their accents in English; it's always a soupšon, never a soupcon. Why should na´ve be any different?
Naive is a more thoroughly anglicized word than (e) and soupšon are; further, it is a common word not only in print but in speech also, meaning its pronunciation is widely known and the diaeresis would be very unlikely to be helpful to anyone reading it.

Plus, ne, nee, and soupcon look stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-25-2004, 02:56 AM
matt_mcl matt_mcl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
As do 'roue', 'jette', 'flambe', and 'saute,' and 'divorce' (meaning divorcÚ) is just completely unhelpful.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-25-2004, 06:51 AM
Mariemarie Mariemarie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 614
I would use umlauts, cedillas, and acute accents if I weren't too lazy to figure out how to do it on the VB boards.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright ę 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.