0
Kooyeen Posted 19 years ago
Speech & Pronunciation
fork in knife
Hi,
A fork and knife.
A fork in knife.
Milk and sugar.
Milk in sugar.
There should be no difference, right? (unless you speak slowly)
Thanks
A fork and knife.
A fork in knife.
Milk and sugar.
Milk in sugar.
There should be no difference, right? (unless you speak slowly)
Thanks
Top answer
Hi, There's certainly not much difference, if any. Clive
- Hi, There's certainly not much difference, if any.
- Clive
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
11 Answers
0
0
I tried these several times. I was surprised to hear that it takes me less time to say the versions with "and" than the ones with "in". I tend to reduce the "and" nearly to syllabic N. I hear myself saying the lax i in in more distinctly. All in all, not much difference between them, though.
CJ
CJ
00
Hi,
However, please be careful if you say quickly to someone, 'Please give me a fork in knife'. It could be misinterpreted.
However, please be careful if you say quickly to someone, 'Please give me a fork in knife'. It could be misinterpreted.
00
That's right, because of elision (the /d/ in and is not pronounced because it is surrounded by other consonants) and weak forms (and and in are both structure words and therefore not stressed. Their vowel sounds are reduced to /?/)
The end result:
/f?:k?nna?f/ (I'm not sure if that second /n/ should be there - I left it in because when I pronounce it the sou
The end result:
/f?:k?nna?f/ (I'm not sure if that second /n/ should be there - I left it in because when I pronounce it the sou
00
Thanks for all your replies...
Yeah, you said "not much difference", but... the fact is that I'm afraid in most cases there could be a difference in "production", but no difference in "perception". Obviously, I'm talking about "normal fast speech". Yes, those could well be two differents kinds of schwa (in theory, and only slightly different), but I'm afraid that's not true for everyone. For
Yeah, you said "not much difference", but... the fact is that I'm afraid in most cases there could be a difference in "production", but no difference in "perception". Obviously, I'm talking about "normal fast speech". Yes, those could well be two differents kinds of schwa (in theory, and only slightly different), but I'm afraid that's not true for everyone. For
00
KooyeenDo you guys ever pronounce the N in AND like NG, as in PING? (when AND is reduced, obvioulsy)
Thi-uh-nks
00
Do you guys ever pronounce the N in AND like NG, as in PING?Sort of. It may happen almost "unintentionally". Under the conditions you describe and is basically rendered as a nasal -- any nasal consonant -- so it may adjust to the following consonant accordingly.
Peter N Paul / Peter NM Paul / Peter M Paul
bed N breakfast / bed NM breakfast / bed
00
Wow, interesting. I think that's true... English has a lot of weird features if you think about it. Well, I'd better not think too much about all those features, or I'll confuse myself.
00
The usual order by the way is "knife and fork". (This precludes the fork-in embarrassing misunderstanding that Clive mentioned.)
MrP
MrP
00
You know what? I didn't even realize there was a kind of joke... you are right! LOL, that's funny...
Hey, you, gimme a forking knife, quick!
Now, if you think of some non-rhotic accent, that might well be... the way they spoke in "This is England" (I didn't see the movie, I just watched some clips on Youtube though).
Hey, you, gimme a forking knife, quick!
Now, if you think of some non-rhotic accent, that might well be... the way they spoke in "This is England" (I didn't see the movie, I just watched some clips on Youtube though).
0
Related Questions