Talk:Rhoticity in English/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

AAVE and non-rhotic white Southern dialects

It's interesting that a large region of white non-rhoticity correlates strongly to the heart of the Black Belt region of the Southern U.S. Surely this is not just a coincidence?--Pharos 04:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it isn't. AAVE is typically non-rhotic because its roots lie in the coastal south, which historically has featured non-rhotic accents. When blacks migrated to other regions of the country, segregation kept AAVE non-rhotic, even in areas that haven't the faintest history of non-rhoticity like Detroit or Chicago.--Trawicks 09:35, 4 August 2006

Are you saying that AAVE's roots are in the coastal south? For the most part that is inaccurate. Excepting Savannah, Georgia and its vicinity, and Charleston, South Carolina/vicinity, the southern African-American population historically, i.e., pre 1910, was a primarily interior-residing population. Please refer to the maps in articles in or related to the Black Belt. Dogru144 07:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Non-rhotic vs. rothic area in England.

In the article it is stated that, "Areas with non-rhotic accents include Africa, Australia, Malta, most of the Caribbean, most of England (especially Received Pronunciation speakers), most of New Zealand, South Africa and Wales. Singapore and Malaysia are also two examples of countries in Asia with a non-rhotic accent."

The map of England displayed seems to have more area coloured pink for Rhotic than white for Non-rhotic... this would seem to be contradictory. If you are speaking of a majority by population rather than by geographic area it would be best to say so and show statistics in addition to a map.

Beowulf_cam

22 July 2006 @ 1639EDT

Indeed, that would be ideal. It would also be good to have a map reflecting current pronunciation patterns and that is based on both rural and urban speakers, unlike the current map, which is based on data reflecting only rural pronunciation patterns from the 1950s. User:Angr 17:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I tried to draw a map based on the above one and on this one here: [1] If you like it, use it for the article.--Unoffensive text or character 14:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... the map you based yours on doesn't say anything about rhoticity, though. You seem to be just assuming that the dialects that map calls "Southwest" and "Central Lancashire" are rhotic, and all others are non-rhotic. If you look at the map "Traditional dialects" just above that map, it shows the isogloss for rhoticity much farther east, almost to London, like Image:RhoticEngland.png does. User:Angr 15:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure that the regions on that map are based on those in a book by Trudgill (and maybe others) and that rhoticity was one of the features used to define the regions. So the map can probably be justified if the source can be checked.--JHJ 20:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Right, I forgot to mention Trudgill.--Unoffensive text or character 08:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

However, the map needs to be clearer that Liverpool (in Trudgill's Merseyside region) is non-rhotic.--JHJ 20:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved the central Lancashire area up north a bit. Better now? --Unoffensive text or character 09:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, much better. I would support the inclusion of this map, with a reference to Trudgill, now.--JHJ 16:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, provided Trudgill explicitly shows rhoticity isoglosses in the same places where the map does. User:Angr 17:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

How about this link: [2]

By the way: I've tried to change the background colour from black to white, but somehow I did not succeed. Can somebody have a try? --Unoffensive text or character 08:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

How about Trudgill (1990: 51-66), as referenced in that link? The PDF doesn't show rhoticity in central Lancashire, so I'd be interested to know what Trudgill's book actually says about rhoticity in England. Ideally, the background should be transparent, as it is in the upper image, not white. User:Angr 09:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes it does: it says that isogloss 3 "divides the south-west and Central Lancashire around Blackburn from the rest of England". This isn't clear in the map, but it is in the text. Trudgill's book divides the country into a number of regions based on about 7 features, one of which is rhoticity; the three south-western regions and Central Lancs are the four which have rhoticity.--JHJ 10:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The East Riding of Yorkshire was definitely rhotic traditionally, although I think that this is dying out. Epa101 16:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

In fact, if you look at the Survey of English Dialects, you will find traces of rhoticity (occasional use of r in words like farmer or bird) all over the North of England. But the people interviewed for the SED were mostly local farmworkers born in the 1870s and 1880s. The language they spoke is long gone. Rhoticity, to the best of my knowledge, is fading fast, and even in the rural West of England younger speakers tend to abandon it.Unoffensive text or character 13:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I think education level has a lot to do with it as well. I have two friends from Devonshire, one with a clearly rhotic West Country accent, the other with a clearly nonrhotic near-RP. The one with the rhotic accent comes from a working-class background, was barely literate until he was in his early 20s, and is a carpenter. The one with the non-rhotic accent comes from a middle-class background, went to university in England and Germany, and is a language teacher. Angr 14:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Most people in Oldham are still rhotic, which is a bit bizarre when all of the towns that surround Oldham are non-rhotic! Epa101 19:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Rs in rhotic speech

Re current para:

In some dialects of American English, people will add an /ɹ/ to certain words through hypercorrection, the most common examples being /wɔɹʃ/, /ˈwɔɹtɚ/, /aɪˈdiɚ/ and /dɹɔɹ/ for wash, water, idea and draw. This hypercorrection also occurs in the Canadian and British English pronunciation of /ˈkɑɹki/ for khaki, although this is fading over time and many young Canadians now use the American pronunciation of /ˈkæki/.

I don't know if hypercorrection is the right cause or just a convenient label. I don't believe misplaced Rs are peculiar to North America. I am certain I have heard Irish people say "Chicargo", "perjorative", "fermiliar", etc; conversely, one hears "suprise", "paraphenalia", "balmy" (for barmy). These strike me as just mispronunciations like any other, not hypercorrections. The converse to nonrhotic accents having more opportunity for homonyms and consequent misspellings is that rhotic accents have more opportunity for mishearings and consequent mispronunciations, especially if you first hear a word from a nonrhotic source. That said, I don't recall ever hearing intrusive-R from a rhotic Irish speaker. jnestorius^(talk) 19:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Colonel

How should we classify the "r" sound in "colonel"? In practically any other word with an L between two vowels, the L is not silent. Yet rhotic and non-rhotic accents both replace it with their respective forms of "R". Hypercorrection? A mistake that stuck? Simply an oddity? jimgawn.

I believe this is discussed at Colonel. The l is older and etymologically correct (it's related to column), and the word was once pronounced as it is spelled. But having two l-sounds in the word triggered a dissimilation to "coronel", and the word was spelled like that for a while too. But ultimately somehow the l-spelling won out, but so did the r-pronunciation. User:Angr 08:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

In my speech "colonel" and "kernel" are completely indistinguishable. If I ever need to make the distinction clear (though I can't really imagine such a need really arising) I would take care to pronounce the "r" in "kernel". I am a white English-speaking South African, is this normal for my dialect? Roger (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-rhotic accent in Canada in Maritimes

I believe the portion that reads, "In Canada, non-rhotic accents are found in the Maritimes." is incorrect. Typical Maritimer English involves a strong rhotic accent, particularly where the r is preceded by the letter a,i.e. car, bar.

It didn't say "In Canada, non-rhotic accents are typical in the Maritimes." I have here a handout from a talk given by Trudgill which lists the following as having non-rhotic accents: Lunenburg county, Nova Scotia; southern and western New Brunswick, including Grand Manan Island off the coast of Maine; Bay Roberts in Newfoundland, other Newfoundland enclaves. AJD 22:19, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

The non-rhotic accent associated most with Atlantic Canada is that of the South Shore of Nova Scotia (generally that area along the Atlantic coast from SW of Halifax to Shelburne.) It resembles quite closely the accent of northern New England but its origins are more German than English.

Semi-rhotic accent

While the article includes the Caribbean in the list of areas with non-rhotic accents, it would be more accurate to call them semi-rhotic. In Jamaican English, the 'r' is not dropped in word-final position instressed syllables. Words like 'there' and 'car' are pronounced with a final 'r' (a strongy emphasized one at that), while words like 'water' or 'hurt' are pronounced as in non-rhotic dialects. Perhaps due to competing influences from non-rhotic UK and rhotic US? Or the history of both rhotic and non-rhotic dialects immigrating from the UK?Makerowner 22:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, but how predictable is the semi-rhoticity? I was listening on the BBC to the Jamaican Police spokesman announcing that the death of Bob Woolmer was to be treated as murder. The spokesman said: "...killer or killers..." where the first word was pronounced 'killa" and the second two exhibited that lovely round carribean 'r' in a very pronounced way. Jigsawpuzzleman 08:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Rhoticity in pop/rock songs

I'd be interested in a section or an article about "standard English singing pronunciation" as found in pop/rock songs. That is, how this very peculiar form of singing developed, and why. It seems to be mostly like American English, but non-rhotic. (The country music way of singing is different though, and rhotic.) This pronunciation is found all over the world with singers of pop/rock. It seems to have developed through a back-and-forth thing between England and USA when rock was developing. English English speakers adopt a mostly American accent but non-rhotic when singing. Otherwise rhotic Americans convert to non-rhoticism. And people with other than English as a first language who normally would speak in a mostly American and very rhotic accent (probably due to the influence of American pop culture) usually go non-rhotic when entering pop singing mode too. I know that here in Scandinavia it's the absolute norm. This is pretty much all I could find about the subject (Trudgill, who you guys seem to be familiar with, is referenced): http://positiveanymore.blogspot.com/2006/03/dont-believe-ype.html

http://positiveanymore.blogspot.com/2006/06/trudgill-on-pop-song-pronunciation.html

http://positiveanymore.blogspot.com/2006/06/intrusive-intrusive-r.html

Some singers don't conform to this though, like Leigh Nash from Sixpence None the Richer. Others too, of course, which I don't remember now. I think it would be extremely interesting to find out if this is an intentional decision or just subconscious - but that seems pretty impossible, I can't find anything about it online. 193.91.181.142 22:09, 15 October 2006 (UTC) (Nick)

---

That would be really interesting. Mind you, I'm Scottish and speak with a rhotic accent, but I'm pretty sure I sing with a rhotic American accent too. I try to avoid singing in general as it tends to upset the people around me, but if it's in the name of phonetics... (Emma)

There is Johnny Rotten's lead in to "Anarchy in the U.K.", as a rare example of the opposite case, an English-English singer using rhotic delivery: "r-r-r-r-ight now, hahaha" Grant65 | Talk 03:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The r in "right" is pronounced in non-rhotic accents as well, because it's before a vowel. Does he pronounce the r in "anarchy"? —Angr 06:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

No. My point is that his rolling of the initial R on this occasion is striking because it emphasizes the R in a extreme way, like a carnival/music hall/vaudeville MC trying to get people's attention. Grant65 | Talk 06:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

English pronunciation in singing has always been an interesting subject that may well be worth an article. Classical music performed in English seems to adopt a number of fairly radical phonetical simplifications that sound British to North American ears, including a total avoidance of [æ]. My unscientific impression is that the rock and roll tradition began in North America, and that Southern speech from the blues/R&B streams was very influential in the early stages. Rock groups like the Rolling Stones and Beatles got their start imitating NAm recordings. It wasn't until early punk/New Wave that you began to hear British singers singing in BrE on recordings. I remember being somewhat surprised when Siouxsie Sioux recorded We are entronced! Donce, donce, donce! - Smerdis of Tlön 12:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Whereas I always wondered why David Bowie didn't sing "Let's donce!" —Angr 13:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ian Curtis was the opposite of Siouxsie, generally using NAm pronunciation, e.g. in "Transmission " he sang: "dænce, dænce, dænce, to the radio". Grant65 | Talk 08:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

but 'dænce' is the usual pronunciation in Manchester isn't it? Claret 19:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Anthony Newley, Syd Barrett and (early) David Bowie sung in non NAm pronunciation. PS a pedant writes Ian Curtis was from Cheshire(Macclesfield precisely)not that I'd have thought that makes any difference!

Manchester's definitely in the "short A" zone in England, but the northern English "short A" (usually IPA [a], not [æ] - listen to Wikipedia's sound files if you're not sure of the difference) and the American one tend to sound different, so American influence could still be detectable.--JHJ 19:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

In folk songs

As folk songs usually written in a dialect, some of them are rhotic. "Poverty Knock", set in Lancashire, is fully rhotic. "Blackleg Miner" should be rhotic, but most of the bands that cover it hardly pay any attention to its dialect. Epa101 16:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Rhoticity in Scottish English

Are there any non-rhotic regional varieties of Scottish English? Cf. Distribution of rhotic and nonrhotic accents: "Rhotic accents can be found in ... parts of Scotland". This implies that there are other parts of Scotlands, where non rhotic speech prevails. Where would that be?Unoffensive text or character 12:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know whether this counts or not, but what about how some Scottish speakers swallow the /r/ on words such as "nurse", "first", "worst", etc. This also occurs in the Dewsbury area of Yorkshire, where I come from. I've noticed that George Galloway does this? Does this count as not pronouncing an /r/ and thus being non-rhotic or not? Epa101 16:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Letter

I think the section on LETTER is confused. The X-SAMPA [@`] indicates an r-coloured vowel, which would mean a rhotic accent. E.g. the [@`] in LETTER for the fully rhotic Charlesworth (Derbyshire) speaker - [3] - indicates an r-coloured [@] just as the [a`:] or [A`:] in START for the same speaker indicates an r-coloured [a:] or [A:].

The point about Nafferton and Welwick (both East Riding) is that they only show rhoticity on the LETTER set: LETTER [@`], but START [a:] with no r-colouring.

The bit in the caption of the map seems to be right, though: the LETTER-only area in the East Riding isn't shaded.

--JHJ 19:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Definition of non-rhotic

'Non-rhotic speakers pronounce "r" only if it is followed by a vowel'

That seems a little misleading. As a non-rhotic speaker of (as Michael Caine might say) 'English English' I would pronounce 'hair' and 'hare' - or 'four' and 'fore' in the same manner. I don't think I'm clevver enough to define it myself but perhaps someone else could cook up an improvement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jigsawpuzzleman (talk • contribs) 10:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The point is it has to be followed by a vowel sound, not a vowel letter. In hare and fore there is no vowel sound after the R. —Angr 12:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Point taken. That ought, though, to be stipulated (it certainly threw me). Also, apols for putting myself at the top of the page and compounding the thing by forgetting to sign. Jigsawpuzzleman 22:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Examples needed

I've just read the article and find that I don't understand what it is saying. The article seems to describe things in technical terms and discuss the history of the accents, yet I can't get a grip on what difference is being discussed. A few simple examples would go down well - eg a some common word or phrase and simplistic representations of how it is pronounced rhotically and non-rhotically. By Simplistic I mean use normal sltters not IPA or SAMPA or any wacky stuff. This has nothing to do with Rhoticness, but I am aware that scone can be pronounced either skown or skonn while bath can be pronounced either barth or to rhyme with math. Can someone sort out a couple of similar examples here. Cheers. -- SGBailey 21:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like some understandable examples as well, possibly even audio of native speakers? If I understood what the difference was I would be happy to record whichever I have. --Taboo Tongue 21:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this passage from the introduction is perfectly understandable: "Rhotic speakers pronounce written /r/ in all positions, while non-rhotic speakers pronounce /r/ only if it is followed by a vowel sound".

Rhotic speakers say "parrk yourr carr" while no-rhotic ones say "pahk you-uh cah". Unoffensive text or character 14:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

FAC anyone?

I think this is a pretty good article on an aspect of English that stares us in the face but is rarely discussed. I think the paragraphs on rhotic and non-rhotic areas of the world need cleaning up a little (perhaps expanding), and in a few instances referencing is required.

If that is done, should it be listed in the FAC room? Tony 00:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd take it to peer review after cleaning it up and adding references before attempting an FAC. —Angr 07:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

New introductory para

It's much better, but now it doesn't flow smoothly into the second para. Tony 22:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Rhotic in IPA

It seems odd to me that an article on accents and pronunciation, which does indeed have IPA pronunciation guides on it, does not provide the pronunciation of the word 'Rhotic' in any accent. If there's a difference between the GenAm and RP, I think they should both be there. I'd put the IPA there myself, but I've never ~heard~ it elsewhere. My friends and I, looking at the spelling are divided on whether it'd be pronounced (by Australians) to rhyme with "Boat-ick" or "Bott-ick". --The Chairman 04:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I've always heard it with the long o (the vowel of "goat" or "boat") in the first syllable. —Angr 05:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I've found it on the Wiktionary page for Rhotic. I'll add it to the article.

(RP): /ˈrəʊtɪk/, /"r@UtIk/

(US): rōt'ĭk, /ˈroʊtɪk/, /"roUtIk/ --The Chairman 03:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Moved from article

The tags are from February, I think it's long enough.--91.148.159.4 23:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

In some dialects of American English, people will add an /ɹ/ to certain words through hypercorrection, the most common examples being /wɔɹʃ/, /ˈwɔɹtɚ/, /aɪˈdiɚ/ and /dɹɔɹ/ for wash, water, idea and draw. This hypercorrection also occurs in the Canadian and British English pronunciation of /ˈkɑɹki/ for khaki, although this is fading over time and many young Canadians now use the American pronunciation of /ˈkæki/.

Rhoticity in India

Although some speakers of English in India are rhotic, many are not. This may have to do with where one is educated. I studied at English schools in urban India, and I, like most of my peers, am non-rhotic in my pronunciation of English words. I would say that lack of rhoticity is possibly a marker of "good" English-language education in India.

Surely your mother-tongue has an effect on your English. It definitely does in the case of Second language English speakers in South Africa. Are there rhotic and non-rhotic Indian languages? Roger (talk) 08:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Corby

Noticed that an edit trying to add Corby to the list of rhotic areas was rejected recently.

I have never been to Corby in my life. However, I have noticed and also read about the fact that the Corby accent is more like Scottish English than English English. As Scottish accents are almost all rhotic, I would presume that Corby is rhotic. Is this correct? If so, I would have no objection to it being added to the list. Epa101 16:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm adding this to the article due to lack of objections. Epa101 21:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Please only add it if you have a reliable source for it. —Angr 21:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Google doesn't seem to find a lot of linguistic analysis of Corby accents, and what it does find is mostly about other Scottish features than rhoticity. (Apparently some Scottish features have been lost in the younger generations, but enough have been retained that the accent still sounds Scottish to other English people.) There is this, which does explicitly mention rhoticity, but it's only one speaker.--JHJ 16:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. it describes him as a rhotic speaker, but he sounds nearly if not completely nonrhotic to me. —Angr 17:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Incomprehesibility

This article cannot be understood by anyone without a degree in linguistics.

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. —Angr 19:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I suspect the user meant that s/he didn't have a degree in linguistics, so s/he meant it should be rewritten by those who have one. Don't misunderstand me, I won't volunteer. :) --91.148.159.4 12:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed; experts are better placed than non-experts to come down to express their knowledge to the wider public. Tony 13:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Nascent rhoticity in Western Australia?

From Regional accents of English speakers:

In Western Australia, a tendency to pronounce words such as "beer" with two syllables (/biː.ə/ or "be-ah"), in cases where other Australians use one syllable (/biə/), has been noted (Sydney Morning Herald, January 28, 2005).

Does this fit the definition of rhoticity? Grant | Talk 06:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Not if there's no constriction of the tongue to make an r-like sound, no. —Angr 10:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Decline of Rhoticity in England?

The article shows two maps of England, one with far less rhoticity than the other. Has the decline been documented? I can't see it mentioned in the text of the article.--PeterR 14:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The two maps aren't entirely comparable, since one is of rural accents and the other is of urban accents, as well as being from different time periods. —Angr 15:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

rhotic in New York City and Northeast New Jersey

Just an observation of American English accents around New York City. While many pronunciations are very similar throughout the New York City area, one main difference is in rhotic vs. non-rhotic:
- The famous Brooklyn accent is non-rhotic.
- Manhattan has too many people from all over the United States and the world to make an easy conclusion on any local pronunciation.
- The average native New Jersey speaker now speak rhotic English. (A good example is the character Randall Graves from the movie Clerks, played by Jeff Anderson.) However, it's possible in the past it was different; my grandmother, born in 1910 and having grown up in Hudson and Bergen Counties in NE New Jersey, would pronounce some words like father and water in a non-rhotic way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spettro9 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 20 August 2007

Examples of pairs which contrast only for rhotic speakers

Here's a partial list in case it's any use to anyone editing the article.

tuba tuber
tuna tuner
rota rotor
formally formerly
manna manor
coda coder
ova over
ejecta ejector

lava larva
father farther

fought fort
taught tort
sought sort
caught court
law lore
saw sore
thaw Thor

baa bar
fa far
ma mar
spa spar
pa par

— Alan^✉ 06:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Maps are inconsistent

In the England maps the rhotic areas are red while the non-rhotic areas of the US are red. Roger (talk) 08:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

This is indeed very unpleasant.--89.133.83.220 (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

US map misleading

IMHO the US map is way too progressive. It is based on a study of which the main aim was to survey the changes which are under progress in present-day America, and it used data EXCLUSIVELY from urban areas, which are much less conservative than rural areas. The problem with this is that it misrepresents the state of non-rhoticity in Eastern New England and especially the South, because it doesn't show the fact that non-rhoticity is much commoner with older rural speakers than with those whom the study investigated. If you go to the page of The International Dialects of English Archive, for example, you can find recordings from plenty of non-rhotic or semi-rhotic (older) speakers from all over Georgia, the Carolinas and Tenessee, which is not indicated on the map. The same goes for Main and New Hampshire. So I think either another map should be made or the text under the current one should be modified to something like this:

Non-rhoticity is reccessive in the United States. The red areas are those where non-rhotic pronunciation among whites is still common in both urban and rural areas and is found even with many younger speakers. AAVE-influenced non-rhotic pronunciations may be found among African-Americans throughout the country. Map based on Labov, Ash, and Boberg (2006:48) --89.133.83.220 (talk) 21:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Re examples;

Why is "Arse" spelled that way in England? I've never heard one pronounce the 'r'.

72.230.10.152 (talk) 05:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

English spelling is based more on how things used to be pronounced than how they're pronounced nowadays. Have you ever heard anyone pronounce the "k" in "knife"? Me neither. Still, I suspect people from Devonshire do pronounce the "r" in "arse". —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 06:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

With very few exceptions anyone who spells the word arse (eg the English), does pronounce the "r" Snori (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, most people from England don't pronounce "r" in that position, because they speak non-rhotic accents. But there are rhotic accents in England, and Ireland and Scotland are almost entirely rhotic and they spell the word "arse" too. —Angr 05:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Just an aside: Is it true that in England "arse" /ɑ:s/ is the part of the body you sit on and the word "ass" /æs/ is derived from Latin asinus and denotes simply a stupid person? Unoffensive text or character (talk) 07:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"Ass" has a variety of meanings whilst "arse" only has the one. "Ass" could be used in that way or to mean much the same as "arse" or it could be used to mean a cursed thing. One of Shakespeare's plays said, "The law's an ass." This is still a common phrase in Britain today. Epa101 (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

"Ass" is also a synonym for "donkey". Shakespeare used it in that sense to mean that the law is stubborn and stupid like a donkey. That's how my high-school English teacher explained it many years ago. Roger (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)