Scholarly pronunciation of "processes"

[EmilyG]

Most of the time, when I hear university professors or other academic people pronounce the word “processes”, they pronounce the last syllable like “eez”. This isn’t the way ordinary people usually pronounce the word. Why do scholarly people pronounce it differently?

[LuckyDe]

Because they know better?

[solsolsol]

From The Free Dictionary:

Usage Note: In recent years there has been a tendency to pronounce the plural ending -es of processes as (-z), perhaps by analogy with words of Greek origin such as analysis and neurosis. But process is not of Greek origin, and there is no etymological justification for this pronunciation of its plural. However, because this pronunciation is not uncommon even in educated speech, it is generally considered an acceptable variant, although it still strikes some listeners as a bungled affectation. In a recent survey 79 percent of the Usage Panel preferred the standard pronunciation (-z) for the plural ending -es and 15 percent preferred the pronunciation (-z). · Although the pronunciation for process with a long (o), (prss), is more usual in British English, it is an acceptable variant in American English.

[OldGuy]

The way I learned it is that the eez ending is the noun, and the short e, z ending is the verb. It’s not unusual for English verbs and nouns to be pronounced differently. Think of present for example.

[njtt]

I am a former academic, and have spent a lot of my life around academics, and I do not ever recall hearing it pronounced this way. I agree with solsolsol’s quote: if it is used, it is a bungled affectation, like “octopi”.

There is one one rather rare variant pronunciation of “process”. When you are using “process” as a verb, meaning to move forward in a procession, I believe you should pronounce it pro-CESS, with the stress on the second syllable (and the third person present, of course, would be pro-CESS-es, with an s not a z ending sound). I do not suppose everybody actually does that, and a better educated person might be more likely to than another (but then, it is rare to use the word in that sense at all).

[Leaffan]

I thought this would be about “PRAH-cesses” versus "“PROH-cesses.”

[EmilyG]

@Leaffan

I thought this would be about “PRAH-cesses” versus "“PROH-cesses.”

For the record, I’ve heard both “prah-cess-eez” and “proh-ces-eez.”

njtt, you say you haven’t heard it. Maybe it’s a Canadian thing? I’ve heard the “eez” pronunciation both in Canadian universities and on Canadian radio when a university professor is on the radio.

And I don’t mean to rant, but yes, the “eez” pronunciation does sound “affected” to me.

[John_Mace]

@EmilyG

For the record, I’ve heard both “prah-cess-eez” and “proh-ces-eez.”

The latter is a Britishism, although head sometimes in the US.

I tend to say PRAH-cess-eez just because PRA-cess-es is harder to say and sounds like you are going to say PRAH-cess-es-es-es-es…

[JKellyMap]

@John_Mace

The latter is a Britishism, although head sometimes in the US.

I tend to say PRAH-cess-eez just because PRA-cess-es is harder to say and sounds like you are going to say PRAH-cess-es-es-es-es…

I agree with the second sentence. Not a bungled affectation, just easier to say, and less ambiguous for the hearer.

As for the first sentence…I’m pretty sure it’s also a Canadianism.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

I’ve also heard the “eez” suffix used at the end of the plural of “diocese.” Singular pronounced “DI osis,” plural “DI osis SEIZE.”

[Leo_Bloom]

Dioceses is the “correct” way, ala processes (ie no "eez)?

[tallcoldone]

“Bungled Affectation” – Band Name!

[Elendil_s_Heir]

Drew Gilpin Faust, president of Harvard University, pronounced “processes” with a final “eez” sound several times in Death and the Civil War, broadcast tonight on PBS.