It's "sodder", not "soLder", damnit! (for us USAians)

[Analog Kid]

Why should there even be a single name for a country?

Why indeed?

That's kind of my point.
Life's more interesting with more variations.

[Sorama]

Why should there even be a single name for a country?

Why indeed?

That's kind of my point.
Life's more interesting with more variations.

says the one who can't stand it people pronouncing words differently.

[themadhippy]

It's not just spelling of place names, it's also pronunciation

Milngavie   

[sanleontexas]

I stand here in shame that that I missed you post; however, in my defense,
I have to say that this has been bothering me since the outset and finally
worked up the nerve to say something.

[scopeguy27]

The funny part is that the silent L goes back centuries and both British and American speakers dropped it, just not uniformly, so everybody arguing etymology in this thread is technically right. English keeps silent letters in plenty of technical words without anyone starting threads about them. The real crime here is the crappy music - no pronunciation survives that.

[golden_labels]

(…)  Who cares?  (…)

Where such language regulations apply tells us who cares. Diplomats and, where interpretation of officials’ actions happens, courts. They have good reasons to.

For politicial or ideological reasons that may be further taken out of the original context or the mechanism may be abused, but this is not the original intent.

[Sorama]

It's not just spelling of place names, it's also pronunciation:  in both North and South Carolina there is a city called "Beaufort", but it is pronounced differently in each state:

South Carolina : Byoo-furt
North Carolina: Boh-furt

And both pronouncements are wrong, considering it’s a French word.
Why can’t no single English speaking person (wether UK or US) pronounce it as it should?

Both countries like to use French words but not the pronunciation, God forbid!

[Analog Kid]

Why should there even be a single name for a country?

Why indeed?

That's kind of my point.
Life's more interesting with more variations.

says the one who can't stand it people pronouncing words differently.

Wrong.
What I can't stand is schoolmarmish people telling me what the "correct" pronunciation is when it clearly isn't.
As I've written before, they can pronounce anything any fucking way they want to. Just don't tell me it's the "right" way, especially when it isn't.

[Analog Kid]

I stand here in shame that that I missed you post; however, in my defense,
I have to say that this has been bothering me since the outset and finally
worked up the nerve to say something.

So I'm curious: just what did you say?

[Analog Kid]

It's not just spelling of place names, it's also pronunciation:  in both North and South Carolina there is a city called "Beaufort", but it is pronounced differently in each state:

South Carolina : Byoo-furt
North Carolina: Boh-furt

And both pronouncements are wrong, considering it’s a French word.
Why can’t no single English speaking person (wether UK or US) pronounce it as it should?

Both countries like to use French words but not the pronunciation, God forbid!

You really don't get it, do you?
"Des Moines", a city in Iowa, U.S.A., is no longer a French name. It's an American name. And as such, the American speakers are free to butcher, bastardize and otherwise mangle it however they see fit.
We don't have a gov't. agency telling us how we shall spell and pronounce our names.

What about those multiple Swiss names someone posted upthread here? Would you have them select one and call that the "proper" name and ban the others?

Your view of how language works seems quite constrained and restricted. Maybe it's because of where you live.

[Monkeh]

We don't have a gov't. agency telling us how we shall spell and pronounce our names.

Err.. actually you do, at the state level.

And at the top of the federal government, for that matter..

[TimFox]

We don't have a gov't. agency telling us how we shall spell and pronounce our names.

Err.. actually you do, at the state level.

Which State of the Union dictates spelling and pronunciation of our names?
Here in Illinois, I see lots of names that wouldn't get past a bureaucratic decision.
France and Japan are different.

[Gyro]

Why should there even be a single name for a country?

Why indeed?

That's kind of my point.
Life's more interesting with more variations.

says the one who can't stand it people pronouncing words differently.

Wrong.
What I can't stand is schoolmarmish people telling me what the "correct" pronunciation is when it clearly isn't.
As I've written before, they can pronounce anything any fucking way they want to. Just don't tell me it's the "right" way, especially when it isn't.

I vowed to leave this thread alone but...

In the very first post, you told American members what the "correct" pronunciation of a word was and got very heated when a fellow American didn't pronounce it the way you thought was the "right" way.

I still don't get the obvious double standard.

[Monkeh]

Which State of the Union dictates spelling and pronunciation of our names?
Here in Illinois, I see lots of names that wouldn't get past a bureaucratic decision.
France and Japan are different.

California, Texas, Michigan, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Idaho, and Virginia all restrict the characters you may use in a name. No José allowed. Or Eòin.

[TimFox]

Which State of the Union dictates spelling and pronunciation of our names?
Here in Illinois, I see lots of names that wouldn't get past a bureaucratic decision.
France and Japan are different.

California, Texas, Michigan, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Idaho, and Virginia all restrict the characters you may use in a name. No José allowed. Or Eòin.

California, for example, will not record diacritical marks on a birth certificate, but allows use of "José" otherwise.
Illinois is more liberal, and accepts numbers and special characters on birth certificates.

[Analog Kid]

Why should there even be a single name for a country?

Why indeed?

That's kind of my point.
Life's more interesting with more variations.

says the one who can't stand it people pronouncing words differently.

Wrong.
What I can't stand is schoolmarmish people telling me what the "correct" pronunciation is when it clearly isn't.
As I've written before, they can pronounce anything any fucking way they want to. Just don't tell me it's the "right" way, especially when it isn't.

I vowed to leave this thread alone but...

In the very first post, you told American members what the "correct" pronunciation of a word was and got very heated when a fellow American didn't pronounce it the way you thought was the "right" way.

I still don't get the obvious double standard.

There's no double standard. Maybe you missed the point, which may be my fault for not writing as clearly as I should have.

I'm not insisting that "sodder" is the correct pronunciation; in fact, I'm not saying there's any "correct" one.
What I'm saying is that "sodder" is ovewhelmingly the pronunciation of the word that's actually used in this country (the U.S.). Right or wrong, that's what people say.

It's a matter of usage, not propriety.

[Monkeh]

California, for example, will not record diacritical marks on a birth certificate, but allows use of "José" otherwise.

Which means you may not legally be called José. Or Eòin - or Eóin, which is not quite the same.

[Analog Kid]

We don't have a gov't. agency telling us how we shall spell and pronounce our names.

Err.. actually you do, at the state level.

And at the top of the federal government, for that matter..

Seems like @TimFox has pretty well demolished your statements here.

The only instance of regulation of names by gov't. in the U.S. that I know of is the use of place names by the Postal Service and by the U.S. Geologic Survey for use on maps. They have certain rules about the use of punctuation (or restrictions against their use), like Miller's Falls versus Millers Falls, for instance.

Other than that we're pretty much free to use proper names as we please.

[Analog Kid]

California, for example, will not record diacritical marks on a birth certificate, but allows use of "José" otherwise.

Which means you may not legally be called José. Or Eòin - or Eóin, which is not quite the same.

So, does Yurp, in general, allow the use of Unicode characters in personal names in ID?
I have no idea what the situation is here in the U.S. with regard to such characters. I imagine it's a hot mess.

[Monkeh]

We don't have a gov't. agency telling us how we shall spell and pronounce our names.

Err.. actually you do, at the state level.

And at the top of the federal government, for that matter..

Seems like @TimFox has pretty well demolished your statements here.

I'm rather confused as to whether you're reading the same posts I am. He has said not a single word which refutes my statement that multiple states tell you how you may spell your name.

So, does Yurp, in general, allow the use of Unicode characters in personal names in ID?

Do countries which use non-English alphabets and names allow people to use them? You really just asked that?

Different countries have quite a range of rules on allowed names, though.

[Gyro]

There's no double standard. Maybe you missed the point, which may be my fault for not writing as clearly as I should have.

I'm not insisting that "sodder" is the correct pronunciation; in fact, I'm not saying there's any "correct" one.
What I'm saying is that "sodder" is ovewhelmingly the pronunciation of the word that's actually used in this country (the U.S.). Right or wrong, that's what people say.

It's a matter of usage, not propriety.

Yes I'm clearly not understanding your point so there is a communication error.

You seem to be making a 'therefore all swans are white' error in terms of how all of your fellow Americans pronounce it. The very fact that the guy in the video doesn't, disproves your theory.

The actual thread title reinforces your insistence on the correct pronunciation for "USAians".

Please explain to me why I'm wrong, because I really am confused.


EDIT: Ok I'm reading "overwelmingly" as 'all' but that gives the video guy perfect license to pronounce it as he wants, as a 'minority group'.

[Analog Kid]

EDIT: Ok I'm reading "overwelmingly" as 'all' but that gives the video guy perfect license to pronounce it as he wants as a 'minority group'.

HE CAN PRONOUNCE IT ANY FUCKING WAY HE WANTS TO!

HE JUST DOESN'T GET TO TELL US THAT HIS WAY IS THE CORRECT WAY!

[Monkeh]

EDIT: Ok I'm reading "overwelmingly" as 'all' but that gives the video guy perfect license to pronounce it as he wants as a 'minority group'.

HE CAN PRONOUNCE IT ANY FUCKING WAY HE WANTS TO!

HE JUST DOESN'T GET TO TELL US THAT HIS WAY IS THE CORRECT WAY!

And nor do you.

[Gyro]

EDIT: Ok I'm reading "overwelmingly" as 'all' but that gives the video guy perfect license to pronounce it as he wants as a 'minority group'.

HE CAN PRONOUNCE IT ANY FUCKING WAY HE WANTS TO!

HE JUST DOESN'T GET TO TELL US THAT HIS WAY IS THE CORRECT WAY!

I watched the video again when you told me that last time. I'm not falling for it again. Timestamp?


EDIT: I just went through the video yet again. At no time does he "tell us that his way is the correct way" (ignoring your Caps lock). So, timestamp - OR you're the only one who's been doing the 'telling'!

[Analog Kid]

Your view of how language works seems quite constrained and restricted. Maybe it's because of where you live.

Or maybe it's because I have a Master's Degree in Germanic Languages, was a PhD candidate in Linguistics, and earned a living as a translator in multiple languages

Please don't further confuse the thread with misattribution.
My comment above was made to @Sorama, not to you.
(You're free to reply, of course, but you make it look as if that statement was addressed to you when it wasn't.)