The phrase is not French. To say “what,” the relative pronoun, in French is “ce que.” The “ce” is required.
It “drives you up a wall” when non-native speakers don’t pronounce things the way native speakers do? You must spend a lot of time at the top of walls…
You’re essentially insisting that no one speak with an accent.
And “que” in French is not pronounced “Kay” the way Doris Day sings it.
Thanks for putting words in my mouth.
Sorry, but, how can /e/ sound like “ay” when “ay” represents a dipthong? Two vowels, not one! If someone said “like the first vowel in day” I could understand it, but nobody says that.
Nava, we’ve been over this a hundred times with you. In English, there is no Spanish “e” sound without the “y” sound following, so when teaching someone to pronounce a Spanish word WHEN RESTRICTING ONESELF TO NATURALLY OCCURRING ENGLISH SOUNDS, describing Spanish “e” as “close enough” to English “ay” is GOOD. It’s the CORRECT THING TO DO, for answering a question from someone expecting only “level one” knowledge.
For “level two” knowledge – learning a NEW SOUND that doesn’t exist in one’s language (i.e., for English speakers, Spanish “e” without the “y” following) – your complaint would be germane.
I think you and I have been having this friendly argument – about which of these two levels of knowledge is more appropriate in various contexts in this board – for twelve years and counting! 
Because, in English, they are allophones. As in, any time /e/ appears, we can (and usually do, in most dialects) say the diphthong.
It is a common problem with trying to teach English speakers learning another language how to say [e] without saying [ej].
(A few months ago, we had the exact same argument about syllable breaks. I helped an English speaker pronounce Aragonés, and Nava complained about where I had placed the syllable breaks. This is something that doesn’t matter in English at all, so I placed them where they’d be most helpful to the OP – “level one.” Nava was irate that I wasn’t taking the opportunity to teach the OP a “level six” lesson, even though placing the syllable breaks her way would have not changed the OP’s pronunciation at all.)
That is not a new sound :smack: it’s a new sound combination. And it’s got nothing to do with syllable breaks.
We’re not asking people to come up with some obscure new spelling, or to learn IPA, we’re asking you guys to understand the difference between one and two.
I do know that EFL speakers have problems with the vowel combinations of Spanish - just witness the way Diego gets massacred about 3/4 of the time, although it’s getting better. But our problem with “ay” is with how you report the pronunciations in your own language.
I knew you were going to say “that’s not a new sound,” which is why I was so careful to write “…with y following”. As BigT tried to clarify to you, it’s about allophones.
And I never said it had to do with syllable breaks – that’s why I mentioned them in a separate post, and in parentheses. I was clearly referring to a different example of the same difference of opinion between you and me, about the most appropriate level of language pedagogy in threads like this. (True, I should have made this clearer, by writing “…but in that case, it was about syllable breaks”).
Are you saying that if someone talked to you guys about monde, toosde, wensde, you wouldn’t find it strange? A true allophone works in both directions.
Those would be perfect ways to represent the English pronunciations, to a Spanish speaker, for “level one” understanding. But the jump to “level two” would indeed be smaller in this case – to “mondei,” etc. – because the “ei” combination of sounds is NOT foreign to Spanish, while the Spanish bare “e” sound (without a “y” following) IS foreign to English.
…
For a level one understanding, a Spanish speaker would transcribe the English pronunciations as móndei, túsdei, güénsdei… that I is extremely evident.
You really have no idea how little you think like someone with Spanish as their first language, do you?
(By the way, Nava, I never object to your offering “level two” (or higher) explanations in these threads. So, perhaps you could offer them as alternatives to my (or others’) “level one” explanations, rather than getting exasperated by them!).
I do indeed know that’s how they would transcribe them. That’s exactly why I said “…ei” does exist in Spanish, and so it would make perfect sense to consider that a very “low-level” description, requiring the least possible effort by both the transcriber and the listener.
I was only responding to your question about whether “monde” would produce an acceptable pronunciation (at a basic level) for the English listener.
I’ll grant you this much: “Level Two” is necessary for even the most basic explanation, if you’re teaching an English speaker how to say “comb” in Spanish!
I’ll tell you guys what. As soon as English speakers decide on the one and true way to pronounce English words, we can then move on to the one and true way for English speakers to pronounce the sounds in other languages (based on words in English). There are quite a few sounds in “English” that “English speakers” are unable to hear or pronounce.
Speaking for myself, I doubt I would notice, especially if it’s consistent with the rest of their accent. English vowels are pretty wide-ranging and malleable, especially in an urban area where you may be dealing with a half dozen or more accents on a daily basis. Hell, it wasn’t only until a few years ago that I noticed some people pronounce “Monday” as “Mondee,” with an “ee” /i:/ instead of “ay” /eI/ sound at the end. (It’s even listed as a pronunciation in the dictionary.)
Though you may not understand it, you just have to trust that to a lot of at least native American English speakers (don’t know about other varieties of English) it does sound more like an “ay” than an “eh.” It’s pretty evident based on, well, how the majority of AE speaking people transcribe and say back the word. We don’t really pay much attention to whether something is a pure vowel or a diphthong. Most English speakers probably don’t even know what a diphthong is. I know to you it seems inconceivable that someone can mistake a pure vowel for a diphthong but, yes, it’s possible and quite common. Just as I trust that it is annoying to at (some/most?) Spanish speakers when people say /eI/ instead of /e/, when to me, they’re close enough and I can’t imagine it being a problem in comprehension. Those sorts of vowel shifts are very common in English, especially diphthongs being turned into pure vowels by non-native speakers or even speakers from a different dialect region.
For most Americans, I think the vowels in “take” and “day” are exactly the same. For me, they are. Maybe folks in the midwest draw out their vowels more, but I think they probably draw out the vowels in both those words about the same.
If I were to transcribe something as having an “ay” sound, that would only be to distinguish it from a long “a” and a short “a” (as in “at”).