Does the word 'rhythm' have one or two syllables?
I'm wondering if there are any reasons for or against a sound-based argument vs a written-based argument.
-
7Syllables are a vocal property of language. A dictionary will tell you the prevailing pronunciation has two syllables. There is nothing about the spelling that has to do with syllable count.– MetaEdOct 3, 2013 at 1:56
-
1Related: english.stackexchange.com/questions/80224/… Odd how this question is on the verge of closure, but a related one asked last year has 27 upvotes and no close votes. I could understand close votes being cast because of duplication, but they are being cast as "off-topic". Say what?– J.R.Oct 3, 2013 at 10:01
-
@J.R. I think close-votes for duplication and off-topic would both be equally as likely for the simple fact that I had no idea how to articulate such a question (and thus couldn't search for it, or coerce it into a strong fit for stackexchange). That 'related' question is exactly what I was after, however. Thanks!– Fabian TampOct 3, 2013 at 13:15
-
1In retrospect, I regret my general reference close vote, because it's easy to draw incorrect conclusions about syllabification from a dictionary.– Bradd SzonyeOct 3, 2013 at 20:41
-
Following the chain of comments I'm marking this as a dupe instead.– RegDwigнtOct 11, 2013 at 18:23
|
Show 1 more comment
2 Answers
It may appear from spelling that rhythm has only one syllable, because it has only one vowel. However, the M is a syllabic consonant which forms a syllable of its own. Sonorant consonants like L, M, N, and R can act as the nucleus of a syllable just as a vowel can (although English dictionaries often insert a schwa to represent the nucleus).
answered Oct 3, 2013 at 2:59
-
-
8I'm puzzled as to how this seems like a duplicate of the other answer. We reached the same conclusion but otherwise posted entirely different information. My answer addresses why the word has two syllables despite a spelling that might suggest otherwise, with additional information about the nature of syllables themselves. Oct 3, 2013 at 4:28
-
8@Tom Just because there's already a correct answer doesn't mean there couldn't be a better one. I'm glad OP accepted the more informative answer, rather than just the answer with the most upvotes (aka. the first answer); it seems like most askers don't. Oct 3, 2013 at 5:06
-
1Do you have an example of a dictionary listing rhythm as a one-syllable word? Words like fire certainly can be pronounced with one syllable or two, depending on whether you merge the R into the coda or pronounce it syllabically, but I cannot imagine merging the M of rhythm into the coda of the first syllable. Oct 3, 2013 at 10:05
-
1Oh! I see now. Those "syllable" dots are for hyphenation, not for pronunciation. Rhythm can't be hyphenated because the second syllable is only one letter, and English conventions don't permit that. Note that the pronunciation includes a schwa before the syllabic M, which is how the dictionary indicates it's a separate syllable. Oct 3, 2013 at 13:26
It has two syllables. Syllables are entirely features of pronunciation, not of writing, so written-based arguments are irrelevant.
-
1Indeed, "Worcestershire" looks like it has five syllables, based on orthography.– KazOct 3, 2013 at 5:30
-
Carrying an argument too far may not be advisable in most cases. See also: answer by Bradd Szonye– KrisOct 3, 2013 at 6:19
-
@Kaz - "Worcestershire" can look also like it has three, depending on where you look.– J.R.Oct 3, 2013 at 10:07
-
@J.R. Sure, if you don't look at the two places where two syllables are hiding, then all you see is three. :)– KazOct 3, 2013 at 18:25
-