Print

Print


Yes, I know. But that's a pronunciation difference, whereas the rest of the
list and the discussion has been about usage. Nowhere are "which" and
"witch" interchangeable lexical items; they're distinct ones - that happen
to sound identical in lects without the W-/WH- distinction.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:16 Eyal Minsky-Fenick <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > When you say you distinguish "witch" and "which", are you moving from
> YAEUT
> > to YAEPT? Because I don't know of any variety that conflates those actual
> > words, only ones where they're homophones...
> >
>
> Any variety that distinguishes between /w/ and /ʍ/ will do; it will
> pronounce them as [wɪtʃ] and [ʍɪtʃ], respectively.
>
>
> > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:24 Charles Brickner <
> [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Fear not! You're not alone. I agree that language changes as time
> passes,
> > > but I have chosen to be conservative. Of course, I'm sure I'm much
> older
> > > than you. I agree with you and Crista about the use of "certain". I
> > > distinguish "further" and "farther", "which" and "witch", "can" and
> > "may".
> > > I do not use "their" with a singular subject. I'm not afraid to use
> "gay"
> > > to mean "happy", nor to name the seventh planet Ur'anus; I've been out
> of
> > > grade school for quite some time!
> > > I allow others their idiolect. I use mine and have yet to be
> > misunderstood.
> > > Charlie
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Eyal Joseph Minsky-Fenick
> [log in to unmask] (personal)
> [log in to unmask] (school)
> 203-393-1394 (home)
> 203-988-2234 (cell)
> 9 Birch Rd., Woodbridge, CT 06525
>