Leela's wrist gizmo

I think this is version 1.0:

http://totallyabsurd.com/geekpouch.htm

Appropriate that version 1.0 goes on the left hand...will all the others go on the right?

Herb Kauhry wrote:

On or about Sat, 04 Oct 2003 03:30:35 -0400, Matt Garvey made the sensational claim that:

Maybe Leela's just left handed.

LooseChanj wrote:

The idea was that in 1ACV01 (and assorted background shots in later eps), she wore it on her left hand, but then after that it was always on the right.

If you're going for haikus, you're missing a syllable on "inquire within if you."

Howard Wilson II wrote:

No, in-KWIR, like most people do - my dictionary gives only one pronunciation, which is 2 syllables, though long I or O plus R can be closer to 2 just for that syllable, so I guess it's a tough one to call. But strictly speaking, it's 2.

I vote for in-qua-yar.:)

Leons Petrazickis import java.lang.Disclaimer;

Petrazickis wrote in message news:...

According to Merriam-Webster On-Line ( http://www.m-w.com/ ):

Pronunciation: in-'kwIr

There's also a .wav file you can download. -- Christopher Heckman

On or about 7 Oct 2003 13:36:32 -0700, Proginoskes made the sensational claim that:

Fsck'em.

I say it "in-kwi-er".  :-P~~~~~

LooseChanj wrote in message news:...

If you don't believe me, check it out for yourself. -- Christopher Heckman

And I say "tomacco". -- Christopher Heckman

"Matt Garvey" wrote in message news:[email]...

for

within

pronunciation,

for

This is a first. I have never disagreed with a dictionary before, but this time it's wrong. "Inquire" has three syllables, just like "retire." If you look it up here: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary You can click on the little speaker icon, and you will hear a spoken recording of the word. You can clearly hear the *three* syllables. And yes, it says "retire" has only two syllables also.

Notice that "tire" has only one syllable. Adding a "re" only adds one more.

"Matthew Miller" wrote in message news:[email]...

this

you

I disagree. "Tire" has two syllables. The dictionary says it has only one, but play the word. There are two syllables there.

"That Guy" wrote in message news:iPYib.1618$[email]...

If

And

one,

Are you crazy? There's a t, a long i sound, then an r. It's one syllable.

How about "fire"?

The letter r is a bit strange, as it's not a regular consonant but rather what's called an "approximant" -- it's sort of part way between a regular consonant and a vowel. So what you end up with is really a blend of the vowel sounds from the I diphthong going into the "r" at the end.

Another very similar letter is "l". It's also an approximant, and very closely related to "r". (Hence the expensive talking Japanese camera which announces "Too crowdy! Use frash!". I am not making this up. But it is a tangent; back to the topic at hand.) Look at the word "foil" -- also listed as one syllable, but again with a clear change in vowel sounds. I'm kinda tending to agree with you here -- a lot of stuff I see online says "it's a diphthong", but that's in the "oi" part, not the whole oi-l sound.

Ooh, or try this: look up "royal" and "roil" on M-W, and play their pronouncations back to back. You can tell a difference in the last vowel sound (more "a" in the former) but there's pretty clearly exactly the same stress/emphasis/sound-split -- yet they list roy-al as two syllables and roil as one.

I've never heard them called approximants before, but I have heard L and R distinguished as "liquid" consonants - they are definitely distinct, particularly after certain long vowels and diphthongs...but I think it's definitely still 1 syllable (that is, those sounds - "inquire" would be 2 total) - regionally such words may be pronounced so these sounds are closer to two... But consider "sphere" as another example; most of us would agree that's one syllable yet the "sph" sound can be tough to get out fluidly...similarly with classic words starting with "x" or "kt" - I can pronounce them effortlessly but others may prefer "ek-s[vowel]" or "k[schwa]-t..."

Matthew Miller wrote:

"Matthew Miller" wrote in message news:[email]...

one,

Cool, thanks for the info.

Maybe I don't fully understand what a syllable is, but IMHO, any word which has two parts that could be accented has two syllables. TI-er could be pronounced ti-ER. It would be an incorrect pronunciation I guess, but the fact that you can accent the last part of the word means there are two syllables. Yes, "fire" is the same.

"That Guy" wrote in message news:CnUib.1609$[email]...

this

you

No they don't. Unless you're pronouncing the e...are you pronouncing the e?

"That Guy" wrote in message news:...

Actually, just http://www.m-w.com/ .

You may hear three syllables, but that doesn't mean there are three. (If you call a horse's tail a leg, it doesn't change the fact that horses have exactly 4 legs. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.) The dictionary only gives 2 syllables.

-- Christopher Heckman

"Proginoskes" wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

is

Inquire

|

just

speaking,

this

you

you

exactly

gives

Good grief!

A syllable is a sound. If you can hear three syllables, then there are three syllables. Never let a book tell you what's real when you can see (or in this case, hear) for yourself.

In article , [email] says...

snip

But what about "hear"? Or, indeed, "your"? Some people would pronounce it "yowah" (and "more" as "mowah"), but I would still say it has one syllable.

Lewis

"Lewis Kirby" wrote in message news:[email]...

(or

True, and that's a good point. IMHO, those are words that can be pronounced as though they have two syllables, but are most commonly pronounced as though they have one.

"That Guy" wrote in message news:Rzcjb.1640$[email]...

(or

No, what you need to do is to take English classes and actually learn what constitutes a syllable, what constitutes a hard consonant, what constitutes a soft consonant, what constitutes a long vowel sound and what constitutes a short vowel sound.

Tire has one syllable. If the Oxford English Dictionary and the other 500 million English speakers in the world say so, then don't you think that you're probably the wrong one? The number of syllables in a word is not a subjective study. It is impossible to have a two syllable word when there is only one active vowel.

If English isn't your first language, then the confusion is understandable. If not, then I hope to God you're in middle school.

"Howard Wilson II" wrote in message news:[email]...

it.

Did you go to first grade?

Do you remember the a,e,i,o,u and sometimes y rule?

Y is a vowel in only.

Geez...you'd think that some of you have never heard of English...

And having done that, maybe he could explain it to you.

The middle school explanation is, not surprisingly, oversimplified.

There's a bit at <http://www.cf.ac.uk/encap/staff/tench/tswords.html> near the end of the section on consonants that applies here. It's talking about 'l', but the same thing is happening with the closely-related 'r' sound here. It's emphasized more in some regional ways of speaking than others, and even then depends on the way the word fits into the sentence. But:

   The dark / l / seems to lead to an additional syllable when it occurs
   after the long monophthongs / i: / and / u: / and the diphthongs / eI,
   aI, OI, @U, aU / - that is when the tongue concludes the vowel
   articulation in a close, or high, position. The tongue needs time to
   adjust to the raising of the back of the tongue for the dark / l /, and
   this adjustment sounds like / @ / and is known as breaking. As this
   adjustment is normal, and because no contrast in meaning is possible,
   there is no need to transcribe this breaking:

   feel 	fool 	         fail 	        file/phial 	foil
   / f i: l / 	/ f u: l / 	/ f eI l / 	/ f aI l / 	/ f OI l /

   foal 	foul/fowl
   / f @U l / 	/ f aU l /

Actually, that's not correct. Words are just symbols. How they are used and how they are pronounced is constantly evolving. If a word or pronunciation becomes commonplace within a culture it will be added to the "official" dictionary. There have always been those who want to protect the 'official' way to pronounce a word, but evolution will take it's course regardless of their efforts.

in article Rzcjb.1640$[email], That Guy at [email] wrote on 10/15/03 7:10 AM:

Not if you're mispronouncing it.

Matt Garvey [email] wrote:

Heh, the wrist gizmos seem to be comparable to wristwatches in the year 3000, a good deal of people have them and they appear to come in a multitude of styles, from Leela's bulky millitaristicesque gizmo to Mr Wrong's sleek silver one.