The pronunciation of 'hyphenation'?

Question

Martin Ambuhl claims that the word hyphenation should be standardly pronounced as hy.phen.a.tion, with the syllabic divisons indicated.

He further maintains that the syllabic division of this word as hy.phe.na.tion is only true for some speakers.
Obviously, he does not know the maximum onsets principle, and probably knows nothing about ambisyllabicity.
What do you think?

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Martin Ambuhl claims that the word hyphenation should be standardly pronounced as hy.phen.a.tion, with the syllabic divisons indicated. He further ... speakers. Obviously, he does not know the maximum onsets principle, and probably knows nothing about ambisyllabicity. What do you think?[/nq]
"Syllable" like "word" means whatever we wants it to mean to best suit our prejudices.
FWIW, I agree with you, Ray, but only because I'm influenced by the Spanish Real Academia's dictate that a syllable must begin with a con-so-nant, rather than a cons-on-ant. So, for me, hyphenation breaks down as 'hy-phe-,na-tion. However, only a maniac would set line breaks according to that, where sense must prevail over sound, so if I had to split it, it'd be "hyphen-ation".

Ross Howard

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Martin Ambuhl claims that the word hyphenation should be standardly pronounced as hy.phen.a.tion, with the syllabic divisons indicated. He further ... some speakers. Obviously, he does not know the maximum onsets principle, andprobably knows nothing about ambisyllabicity. What do you think?[/nq]
The maximum onsets principle isn't universally accepted. See http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/syllabif.htm
which describes the syllibification principles used for the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary.
In particular, I think Wells's principles would put the /f/ in "hyphenation" in the first syllable, as that is more strongly stressed than the second. Similarly I think the /n/ would go in the second syllable, by the morpheme boundary condition. (But if the morpheme boundary is ignored, which it might be, then the /n/ goes in the third syllable because of stress.)
Jonathan

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]"Syllable" like "word" means whatever we wants it to mean to best suit our prejudices. FWIW, I agree ... breaks according to that, where sense must prevail over sound, so if I had to split it, it'd be "hyphen-ation".[/nq]
Thank you for your reply, Ross.
But my question is about how people pronounce that word, although the question grew out of my previous posting about how to break lines. So, now I only care about the way the word hyphenation is pronounced, not about how it should be typographically split at the end of a line.

As you have rightly pointed out, we do not normally pronounce 'hyphenation' with the syllabic divisions promoted by Martin Ambuhl. But the way the word should be pronounced is probably not due to the influence of the Spanish Real Academia's dictate, but due to some universal phonotactic constraints imposed upon human languages.

One constraint, i.e. the maximum onsets principle states that the maximal number of consonants preceding the nucleus (a vowel or vocalic element) should serve as the onset of the syllable. And each language sets its own restrictions on what constitutes a legitimate syllable onset.
For example, the word 'koknee' would be syllabified as kok.nee in English, but ko.knee in German. This is because English does not allow kn- as an onset, but German does. Within such a limit, we look for the greatest number of possible pre-nucleus consonants as an onset.

Usenet · Answer

I go for the morpheme boundary. But let's remember that Fowler pointed out that 'hyphening' was a better word anyhow.
Mike.

Usenet · Answer

Who is Wells? I was taught that a long vowel could end a syllable.

According to AHD, the word is divided thusly: hy-phen-a-tion.

My pronunciation? ,haI f

'neI S@n
Cece

Usenet · Answer

Raymond infrared:
[nq:1]Martin Ambuhl claims that the word hyphenation should be standardly pronounced as hy.phen.a.tion, with the syllabic divisons indicated. He further maintains that the syllabic division of this word as hy.phe.na.tion is only true for some speakers.[/nq]
I've been sitting here trying to work out my pronunciation, and I'm pretty sure that I break it as hy.phen.na.tion. In other words, I hold the 'n' so that it belongs to two syllables.
If I try to pronounce it as hy.phe.na.tion, the result sounds as if I'm saying "high for nation". Not the same thing at all.

Peter Moylan peter at ee dot newcastle dot edu dot au http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]The maximum onsets principle isn't universally accepted. See http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/syllabif.htm which describes the syllibification principles used for the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary.[/nq]
Thank you for your reply,Jonathan.
But I still have some questions.
Where does the article level its criticism against the maximum onsets principle? The artlce has so long many phonetic symbols missing , and is so long that it is hard to locate its arguments against the maximum onsets principle. I would appreciate it if you would show the arguments here.
I also note this article was written around 1990. But one of my textbooks, English phonetics and phonology by Peter Roach, one the editors of the DJ Pronunciating Dictionary, does promote the maximum onsets principle in 2000.
[nq:1]In particular, I think Wells's principles would put the /f/ in "hyphenation" in the first syllable, as that is more ... morpheme boundary is ignored, which it might be, then the /n/ goes in the third syllable because of stress.) Jonathan[/nq]
If /n/ goes to the second syllable, then you would probably pronounce the word as hyphen-ation, with a division between the first morpheme and the second. But is that you actaully pronounce the word? I am very eager to know. Do you likewise pronounce hyphen-ing in the way so indicated?
Perhaps morphemic boundaries are not always well correlated with phonetic ones.
Ray

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I've been sitting here trying to work out my pronunciation, and I'm pretty sure that I break it as hy.phen.na.tion. ... pronounce it as hy.phe.na.tion, the result sounds as if I'm saying "high for nation". Not the same thing at all.[/nq]
Jumping in at midstream and mid-arguments:
As one who typesets many languages and thus has to hyphenate words, I consider the English system of hyphenation inconsistent, exasperating, and barbaric. English hyphenation is based on pronunciation*, not on *morphology as in other languages, and thus brutally tears apart morphemes, if the "wrong" syllable is stressed. Below, I capitalized the STRESSED syllables.
"Bi-OG-ra-phy" (from: bios + graphein) tears apart the morpheme into + . However, "bi-o-GRAPH-i-cal" is hyphenated sanely.

Similarly, "ge-OG-ra-phy" (from: ge + graphein) versus "ge-o-GRAPH-ic" and "to-POG-ra-phy" (from: topos + graphein) versus "topo-GRAPH-ic."

More insanities: "ge-OM-e-try" (from: ge + metron) tears apart into + , but "ge-o-MET-ric" keeps the morpheme intact.

Inconsistent: "AT-mos-phere" (from: atmos + sphaera) tears apart into + , as does the differently stressed . Yet "BI-o-sphere" keeps the morpheme intact. Go figure.
Also, words and names from other languages are frequent victims of wacky English hyphenation.

Reinhold (Rey) Aman

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I've been sitting here trying to work out my pronunciation, ... saying "high for nation". Not the same thing at all.[/nq]
[nq:1]Jumping in at midstream and mid-arguments: As one who typesets many languages and thus has to hyphenate words, I consider ... the morpheme intact. Go figure. Also, words and names from other languages are frequent victims of wacky English hyphenation.[/nq]
i agree wholehearedly with your characterization of English word division "rules." Strangely enough, those rules are messy enough that they seem to no longer be taught. When I was in school, every child of
13 or so had learned at least some basic rules which often go againstmany ideas of proper pronunciation. I have just looked at the Harbrace College Handbook and The Perrin-Smith Handbook. Both of these have a simple rule: look it up in a repurable dictionary. If we give those students copies of COD10, they will never divide a non-hyphenated word again.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I've been sitting here trying to work out my pronunciation, and I'm pretty sure that I break it as hy.phen.na.tion. ... pronounce it as hy.phe.na.tion, the result sounds as if I'm saying "high for nation". Not the same thing at all.[/nq]
Thank you for your reply as an informant.
You have just shown to the ignorant Martin Ambuhl that the theory promoted by a number of phoneticians and me really stands to test: the segment /n/ belongs to -ation, as well as to the preceding syllable. This is a case of ambisyllabicity. (I mentioned this in the beginning of this thread) Obviously, Mr. Ambuhl is entirely unware of that, and therefore fails to recognize the error in the book he cited as an authoritative source.
In fact, overall the book contains a good illustration of the maximal onsets principle and various constraints on it. But there is still at least one example which is inconsistent with the principles promoted in the DJ book, and this example is 'hyphenation'. And Mr. Ambuhl just blindly believes everything written there without thinking whether the examples conform to the principles.

The pronunciation of 'hyphenation'?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions