The recent speech fad that seems to be effecting people is the pronouciation of words such as "performance" with an extra "r" in them, giving "prerformance". Maybe it's just my hearing but I find it extremely irritating...
The recent speech fad that seems to be effecting people is the pronouciation of words such as "performance" with an extra "r" in them, giving "prerformance". Maybe it's just my hearing but I find it extremely irritating...
Best regards,
Jonathan
Charles Tomlinson "Class" from "the way in" (OUP 1974)
"Those midland a's
once cost me a job:
diction defeated my best efforts-
I was secretary at the time
to the author of The Craft of Fiction.
That title was full of class.
You had only to open your mouth on it
to show where you were born
and where you belonged. I tried
time and again I tried
but I couldn't make it
that top A - ah
I should say-
it sounded like gargling.
I too visibly shredded his fineness:
it was clear the job couldn't last
and it didn't. Still, I'd always thought him an ass
which he pronounced arse. There's no accounting for taste."
took me an' me gyp 'and bloody 'alf an hour to write that! Sacrifices ah mehk for you lot!
But I suppose I'm rather, you know, accentless now, darlings...
or just too bloody-mindedly individual to ever pick one up.
As HW Fowler put it - " That different can only be followed by from and not by to is a SUPERSTITION. Not only is to 'found in writers of all ages' (OED); the principle on which it is rejected (You do not say differ to; therefore you cannot say different to) involves a hasty and ill-defined generalization. Is it all derivatives, or derivative adjectives that were once participles, or actual participles, that must conform to the construction of their parent verbs? It is true of the last only; we cannot say differing to; but that leaves different out in the cold. If it is all derivatives, why do we say accordingly, agreeably, and pursuant, to instructions, when we have to say this accords with, agrees with, or pursues, instructions? If derivative adjectives, why derogatory to, inconceivable to, in contrast with derogates from, not to be conceived by ? If ex-participles, why do pleases, suffices, defies, me go each its own way, and yield pleasant to, sufficient for, and defiant of, me ? The fact is that the objections to different to, like those to averse to, sympathy for, and compare to, are mere pedantries. This does not imply that different from is wrong; on the contrary, it is 'now usual' (OED); but it is only so owing to the dead set made against different to by mistaken critics."
'A Dictionary of Modern English Usage' , 1927 edition.
Sorry, SA, I didn't mean to be judgemental, and would just define a speech impediment as a a difficulty in pronouncing a sound usually produced by other members of a person's speech community. Rhotacism (the term used by speech therapists, I think) certainly doesn't at all get in the way of communication like a case of really severe stammering. If it was usual to pronounce an 'r'as a 'w' in a particular place – Croydon, in Roy Hodgson's case – it wouldn't be classed as an 'impediment' (perhaps a more neutral term is now used, or should be used?). But surely rhotacism isn't a common feature today of Londoners' speech? (I hadn't really noticed, by the way, that Roy Hodgson didn't pronounce his 'r's, until some journalists decided it disqualified him from managing the England team)
There are other opinions similar from Fowler's.