# Pronunciation of "read" in humorous asides

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [April 20, 2003, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754 "2003-04-20T02:19:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 17\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JFMichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/aeb1de/32.png) [@JFMichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JFMichael)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/1 "2003-04-20T02:19:24Z")

</div>

Take this for example:

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Exgineer \*  
> \*\*My girlfriend has a similar belief regarding the pot in my house. I thought she was nuts when she first mentioned it (read: scolded me). \*\*

In this context and others like it, is the word “read” meant to be a command or a passive statement? Does it mean: _You_ (implied) read it as scolded, or _This word is_ read as scolded? This may seem trivial but it has bothered me for quite some time. In other words, when you see this, in your head do you say it as “reed” or “red?” (By the way, wouldn’t it make more sense to put the question mark outside of the parenthesis in this case? Am I allowed to do that? Have I gone mad?)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/2 "2003-04-20T02:23:38Z")

</div>

It’s an active command to the reader, so it should be pronounced like “reed”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/3 "2003-04-20T02:25:14Z")

</div>

It’s the latter (“this word is read as ‘scolded’”).

Rhymes with “red.”

As for your second question, question marks, periods and commas either go inside or outside the quotation marks depending on style. I believe inside the quotation marks is the usual American style, and the Brits have begun putting them outside.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/4 "2003-04-20T02:26:04Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by JFMichael \*  
> \*\*In other words, when you see this, in your head do you say it as “reed” or “red?” (By the way, wouldn’t it make more sense to put the question mark outside of the parenthesis in this case? Am I allowed to do that? Have I gone mad?) \*\*

The question mark belongs outside the quotation marks (I assume that you meant “quotation marks” instead of “parenthesis”), since it is punctuating the sentence and not the quoted word. Leaving the question mark inside the quotation marks is incorrect here.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/5 "2003-04-20T02:38:42Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by friedo \*  
> \*\*As for your second question, question marks, periods and commas either go inside or outside the quotation marks depending on style. I believe inside the quotation marks is the usual American style, and the Brits have begun putting them outside. \*\*

British and American usage differ regarding periods and commas in relation to quotation marks, but they are consistent regarding question marks. American usage places a period or comma inside the quotation marks, and British usage places it outside (and has for a long time: the British have not just “begun putting them outside”). But both American and British usage place a question mark inside or outside the quotation marks, depending on its relation to the quoted matter. The following “[rules](http://www.grammarbook.com/)” describe American usage; British usage differs on Rule 1, but is the same on Rules 2-3:

> [@](#):
>
> **Rule 1.** Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks, even inside single quotes.
> 
> _ **Examples** The sign changed from “Walk,” to “Don’t Walk,” to “Walk” again within 30 seconds.  
> She said, “Hurry up.”  
> She said, “He said, ‘Hurry up.’”_
> 
> **Rule 2.** The placement of question marks with quotes follows logic. If a question is in quotation marks, the question mark should be placed inside the quote.
> 
> \ ***Examples** She asked, “Will you still be my friend?”
> 
> Do you agree with the saying, “All’s fair in love and war”?\*  
> Here the question is outside the quote.
> 
> NOTE: Only one ending punctuation mark is used with quotation marks. Also, the stronger punctuation mark wins. Therefore, no period after _war_ is used.
> 
> **Rule 3.** When you have a question outside AND inside a quote, use only one question mark and place it inside the quotation mark.
> 
> _ **Example** Did she say, “May I go?”_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Apex\_Rogers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@Apex\_Rogers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apex_Rogers)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/6 "2003-04-20T02:40:39Z")

</div>

Personally I say reed, however without definitive answer, both sides can be argued.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Aankh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@Aankh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aankh)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/7 "2003-04-20T02:48:26Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by friedo \*  
> \*\*It’s the latter (“this word is read as ‘scolded’”).
> 
> Rhymes with “red.”
> 
> As for your second question, question marks, periods and commas either go inside or outside the quotation marks depending on style. I believe inside the quotation marks is the usual American style, and the Brits have begun putting them outside. \*\*

i’m going to go with **JeffB**. i think it is supposed to be pronounced “reed”.

i’m an extremely lousy grammarian, so my explanation may be very wrong, but i think it has to do with active and passive voises.  
Active: Read (reed) this word as “abcdef”.  
Passive: This word is read (red) as “abcdef”.

Since active is preferred over passive, “reed” is the more accepted version.

however, “red” is not wrong either.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/8 "2003-04-20T02:50:21Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by JFMichael \*  
> **In this context and others like it, is the word “read” meant to be a command or a passive statement? Does it mean: _You_ (implied) read it as scolded, or _This word is_ read as scolded?**

The form is imperative so it is pronounced /'rEd/:

> [@](#):
>
> Main Entry: **1read**  
> Pronunciation: 'rEd  
> Function: _verb_  
> Inflected Form(s): **read** /'red/; **read·ing** /'rE-di[ng]/  
> Etymology: Middle English _reden_ to advise, interpret, read, from Old English _r[AE]dan_; akin to Old High German _rAtan_ to advise, Sanskrit _rAdhnoti_ he achieves, prepares  
> Date: before 12th century  
> _transitive senses_
> 
> . . . .
> 
> **5 :** to use as a substitute for or in preference to another word or phrase in a particular passage, text, or version \<_read hurry_ for _harry_\> – often used to introduce a clarifying substitute for a euphemistic or misleading word or phrase \<a friendly, _read_ nosy, coworker\>

From [Merriam-Webster Online](http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/9 "2003-04-20T02:55:31Z")

</div>

Well, it appears I was half right. 😛

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Aankh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@Aankh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aankh)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/10 "2003-04-20T03:09:49Z")

</div>

oh go pound sand! 😛

hear ye! hear ye! **friedo** and his ‘red’ were correct!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/11 "2003-04-20T03:13:04Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by aasna \*  
> \*\*oh go pound sand! 😛
> 
> hear ye! hear ye! **friedo** and his ‘red’ were correct! \*\*

Um . . . _no_ . . .

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/12 "2003-04-20T03:43:49Z")

</div>

Aasna, go back and read (reed) the explanation again.

Quoting _Merriam-Webster Online_, Brian said:

> [@](#):
>
> The form is imperative so it is pronounced /'rEd/\*

An imperative is a directive – a subtle _order_, if you wish. You don’t say to your child, "Go “red” a book. You say, “Go “reed” a book.” Also, “rEd” means that the _e_ is long – as in reed.

I’m a retired teacher who makes plenty of mistakes. So feel free to knock that red pencil out of my hand and slap me around until I remember that I don’t have to do that sort of thing anymore. :smack:

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Aankh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@Aankh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aankh)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/13 "2003-04-20T03:44:30Z")

</div>

mea culpa.  
i got my pronunciation rules wrong. mixed up my 'red and my 'rEd.

**friedo** , don’t go pound sand.

somewhat related question: can someone point me to a good, easy to read grammar textbook with practice exercises? not a kiddie book, though.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/14 "2003-04-20T03:53:09Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by aasna \*  
> \*\*somewhat related question: can someone point me to a good, easy to read grammar textbook with practice exercises? not a kiddie book, though. \*\*

There are some decent sources online:

Jane Straus, [The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation](http://www.grammarbook.com/).

The University of Calgary, [The Basic Elements of English: An Interactive Guide to Grammar](http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/eduweb/grammar/).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stypticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f05b48/32.png) [@stypticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stypticus)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/15 "2003-04-20T04:10:39Z")

</div>

**aasna** , is that “easy to _red_” or “easy to _rEd_”?

I’m all over the imperative pronunciation, myself. Like, say, white on rice. But on white rice, not that granola brown stuff. That stuff’s too chewy.

As I understand it, the British (and Canadian!) punctuation isn’t so much “always on the outside” as “where it makes sense”. If the piece being quoted contained the punctuation, then include the punctuation in the quote. If you’re adding punctuation to the end of the quote to fit it into your sentence, then it goes outside. You’ll note I quoted ‘“where it makes sense”.’, not ‘“where it makes sense,”’, to make it grammatically parallel with the first quoted part of the sentence. Similarly the quoting in that last sentence has some interesting contortions.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Aankh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@Aankh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aankh)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/16 "2003-04-20T04:16:57Z")

</div>

what, a girl isn’t allowed to make a mistake around here?! sheesh… 🙂

**brianmelendez** , thanks for the links. the Jane Straus site was rather basic. UCalgary was better. but would you happen to know of an actual book? something more advanced, perhaps?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2003, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pronunciation-of-read-in-humorous-asides/169754/17 "2003-04-20T04:37:16Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by aasna \*  
> \*\ ***brianmelendez** , thanks for the links. the Jane Straus site was rather basic. UCalgary was better. but would you happen to know of an actual book? something more advanced, perhaps? \*\*

The best book that I know of with exercises is [_The King’s English_](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0198605072/qid=1050812948/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-7813490-3623923?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) by the Fowler brothers. The book is almost a century old, but stands the test of time well:

> [@](#):
>
> For three generations, a single book dominated the market as the authoritative reference in matters of grammar, style, and usage in the English language: “A Dictionary of Modern English Usage” by H.W. Fowler, first published in 1926, now in its third edition (published 1996). Twenty years earlier, however, Fowler and his younger brother F.G. (their given names were Henry Watson and Francis George) had collaborated on a precursor, “The King’s English,” first published in 1906 (and which went into its third edition a quarter century later, a few years after the first edition of “A Dictionary” appeared).
> 
> This book is every bit as charming and graceful as the later “Dictionary” and, while this earlier work covers fewer topics than “Dictionary,” it treats the ones that it does cover with as much thoroughness and skill as “Dictionary”–in some cases with more thoroughness, since the book is structured as part essay, part textbook, and can thus afford more examples and exercises than “Dictionary.” The book begins by laying out five “general principles” worthy of Strunk and White (whose masterpiece “The Elements of Style” did not appear until half a century later): “Prefer the familiar word to the far-fetched. Prefer the concrete word to the abstract. Prefer the single word to the circumlocution. Prefer the short word to the long. Prefer the Saxon word to the Romance.”
> 
> The Fowlers expand upon those five “principles,” and also treat vocabulary, syntax, punctuation, and other such technical matters in great depth. But amidst these technical chapters they also include a lengthy chapter on “airs and graces,” in which they advise the reader about imbuing writing with art.
> 
> The Fowlers write with every bit as much elegance, flair, and humor as they advise their readers to use, and their mastery of their subject is unsurpassed. “The King’s English” has stood the test of time and, today, a century after its initial publication, it still stands the Fowler brothers with Strunk and White from half a century ago and Bryan Garner of today in the first rank of authors about style and usage in the English language.

I also highly recommend [_Harper’s English Grammar_](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0446311847/qid=1050813148/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_3/104-7813490-3623923?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) by John B. Opdycke, which contains no exercises but does offer clear, thorough explanations and exhaustive examples; and [_The Elements of Style_](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0205313426/qid=1050813352/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-7813490-3623923?v=glance&s=books) by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White, which also contains no exercises but lays out clear, readable advice for correct grammar, style, and usage.

If you are willing to go with a reference work rather than a textbook, I recommend [_A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations_](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0226816273/qid=1050813529/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-7813490-3623923?v=glance&s=books) by Kate L. Turabian; and [_A Dictionary of Modern American Usage_](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195078535/qid=1050813606/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-7813490-3623923?v=glance&s=books) by Bryan A. Garner, perhaps the greatest living writer in the field of American usage.