0

For some du words, the Oxford Dictionary of English lists multiple British English pronunciations, i.e.:

  • reduce: [rɪˈdjuːs], [rɪˈdʒuːs]
  • arduous: [ˈɑːdjʊəs], [ˈɑːdʒʊəs]
  • endure: [ɪnˈdjʊə], [ɛnˈdjʊə], [ɪnˈdʒɔː], [ɛnˈdʒɔː]

However, for other, similar words, the [dʒ] variant(s) is/are not listed:

  • due: [djuː]
  • produce: [prəˈdjuːs]

I have had a blanket pronunciation for most, if not all of these kind of words, off the cuff: the [dʒ] variant. Is [dʒ] an acceptable alternative to [dj] for those words where only [dj] is listed?

  • @ruakh Those links aren't working for me, somehow. I have found some Oxford entries which only list [dj]: 1 2 – Mad Banners Jan 7 '17 at 5:48
  • @ruakh: The Oxford University Press publishes various dictionaries. The one that is publicly available at "oxforddictionaries.com" (seemingly now styled "Oxford Living Dictionaries") is not the same as the OED. – herisson Jan 7 '17 at 5:51
  • @sumelic Which is the authoritative edition? Which editions do Google and Apple use? :) – Mad Banners Jan 7 '17 at 5:53
  • @MadBanners: The OED is generally considered more impressive and authoritative, but they're designed for different things so it's a bit of a case of comparing apples and oranges. The OED is a "historical dictionary". Definitions are presented in order of etymological priority and there are many historical quotations; they try to get the earliest examples they can find of a word being used. The other "Oxford Dictionaries" are focused on modern usage, with alternate definitions for a word being arranged more-or-less from most to least common. – herisson Jan 7 '17 at 6:04
  • Google and Apple's definitions seem to be sourced from some versions of the Oxford Dictionaries of current English, not from the OED. – herisson Jan 7 '17 at 6:05
1

The pronunciation you mention has been described as common, and does not seem to be particularly stigmatized. I have no idea why the Oxford Dictionary only shows it as a possibility for "reduce" and not for "produce". According to Greg Brooks, Dictionary of the British English Spelling System:

All the words in which /dʒ/ is spelt ⟨d⟩ were formerly pronounced with the sequence /dj/, and conservative RP-speakers may still pronounce them that way (or imagine they do). [...] However, I think in current RP the process of affricating /dj/ to /dʒ/ is virtually complete (as Cruttenden, 2014: 83 says) and has eliminated pronunciations with /dj/, which I have therefore ignored. (p. 66)

  • This may be another kettle of fish, but what of [ɒpəˈtjuːnɪti] versus [ɒpəˈtʃuːnɪti]? – Mad Banners Jan 7 '17 at 7:02
  • 1
    Brooks says essentially the same thing about /tʃ/ on page 59. – herisson Jan 7 '17 at 7:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.