Me too. I assume it’s just an American thing. Let’s call the whole thing off.
British. Div-EYE-sieve. I’ve never heard it pronounced the other way.
I pronounce it the other way, just to be divisive.
Dee vi siv
I don’t think that helps at all. Someone could read that and still pronounce it either way. “Vi” could be pronounced “Vigh” or “Veh” depending on the context.
Try again (please note I’m an aussie) Dee (long e) Vigh (long i) Siv (short i)
I do volunteer ESL - I should know (silent k) better
Shit. I just voted “permissive” but I meant to vote “incisive.”
I’m not arguing that you are wrong, I’m just saying that looking at Dee-vi-siv, to me, looks like it could go either way.
The “vi” in Dee-vi-siv is ambiguous phonetically; it could sound like “hit” without the “t” or it could sould like “high” spelled as “hi”. This is just the way I am reading it; I am not saying it’s right or wrong (I know I am probably wrong).
Another vote for either way even though I lean towards the long i version. The short one sounds more appropriate for an academic presentation however. Not sure why.
The sound of the word “EYE” is traditionally transcribed as a Y. The word is dih VY-sihv. Note also the lack of an e at the end of siv, and not using a word like sieve which is not pronounced in the usual way. Only words that follow the normal rules are so used, with the exception of the word eye.
“Traditionally”? There’s IPA (unambiguous, but requires special character set and an hour’s worth of self-taught training to learn how to read it); and then there are the infinite ad-hoc ways that people try to convey pronunciation without using IPA.
/dɪˈvaɪsɪv/
not /dɪˈvɪsɪv/ (nor /dɪˈvɪzɪv/ for that matter)
If this is a more or less standard way of clarifying pronunciations (for standard English speakers? Or, like IPA, does it work for anyone?), then I stand corrected and amend my previous post to add this as a third option (besides IPA, and myriad seat-of-the-pants, whatever-works solutions, like my use of “eye” earlier in this thread).
Or…maybe that IS IPA, just no special characters happen to be necessary in this case?
I’m British, and honestly I’ve never heard it pronounced to rhyme with “permissive”. Yet again I’m surprised at how much debate is possible over pronunciation I assumed was pretty clear.
The first three online dictionaries here http://www.onelook.com/ say it sounds like “incisive.” My schools pounded the use of dictionaries into us grades 1-12, so I’m going with the dictionaries here.
Dictionaries are very underused these days.
Yeah, that’s IPA. And, no, it’s not standard to use in English. Also, you must have missed the special character that looks like a small I. (Or perhaps you don’t have fonts that display it properly.*)
And if you don’t even know IPA, why do you think you have the expertise to tell me I’m wrong? There are three basic systems used. The one with macrons and breves, the one with spelled out words, and IPA. There are myriads of variations, but the one thing they don’t do is use an unfamiliar word that has an unusual pronunciation. It makes no logical sense to use “sieve” because anyone unfamiliar with that word would think it pronounced “seev” instead of “sihv.” (IPA: [siːv] vs [sɪv]).
*Hopefully my changing the font will make the small I more legible
Okay, thanks! You’re right, I overlooked the “i’s without the dots” in Johanna’s reply.
I agree that “sieve” would be a poor choice for ad hoc pronunciation guide. I can’t be sure I can spell the word, let alone predict how others pronounce it.
And as for IPA…just because I said it’s easy to learn doesn’t mean I’VE taken the time to do so! 