[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France

[HenHanna]

Embonpoint is apparently defined as persons who
are considered larger than usual.

I don't know about the English use, but in French it designates a

stomach larger than usual, typically at a male - the special rounded
shape that resembles a pregnant woman. -- Bertel Kolt, Denmark <<<


____________________________

[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France.
It literally translates to "in good point" and historically conveyed a
meaning of healthy weight, fullness, and even prosperity.

Here's why it was seen positively:

Scarcity and Strength: In the past, food scarcity was more common.

Embonpoint indicated someone had access to enough food to be
well-nourished and even robust, which was a sign of health and well-being.

Social Status: A fuller figure could also suggest wealth and
social status. Manual labor was more prevalent, and a thin physique
might be associated with the working class. Someone with embonpoint
might not have had to engage in strenuous physical activity to survive.

Over time, perceptions of body image have shifted in France, as elsewhere.

Today, embonpoint can still be used in a neutral way, but it can also
have a slightly negative connotation, suggesting someone is overweight.

A more positive term for someone who is pleasantly plump might be
**rond(e) **(round).

______________________________

The shift likely began sometime in the 19th century or even earlier.

Here's why:

Early Signs: By the 18th century, there's evidence of some
advocating for slimmer figures, particularly among the upper class. This
suggests a potential beginning of a shift.


постепенное изменение (postupannoe izmenenie) ( постепенное изменение is
the Russian for gradual change, there is no direct equivalent in English
but it conveys the idea of a slow shift over time)


While a precise date is elusive, the gradual change in perception
likely happened between the 18th and 20th centuries.

______________________________________

The American shift in perception happened largely around 1950's-1970's
(the fashion model Twiggy) (Audrey Hepburn)


Here's why this era is significant:

Rise of "The Ideal Figure": The post-war era (post-WWII)
saw a boom in advertising and media. Images of thinness as the ideal
body type for women became increasingly prevalent. Fashion models like
Twiggy, known for her slender frame, became cultural icons.

Focus on Health and Fitness: There was a growing emphasis on
health and fitness during this period. Diet culture started to gain
momentum, with a focus on calorie counting and weight loss.

Shifting Standards of Beauty: Actresses like Audrey Hepburn,
known for her petite figure and gamine look, epitomized the new beauty
standard. These cultural influences significantly impacted how Americans
perceived healthy and attractive body types.

While there was certainly some body diversity before the 1950s, the
post-war era marked a more concentrated push towards a specific ideal of
thinness, particularly for women. This shift continues to influence
perceptions of weight in the US today.

[Bebercito]

Post by HenHanna

Embonpoint is apparently defined as persons who
are considered larger than usual.

I don't know about the English use, but in French it designates a

stomach larger than usual, typically at a male - the special rounded
shape that resembles a pregnant woman. -- Bertel Kolt, Denmark <<<
____________________________
[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France.
It literally translates to "in good point" and historically conveyed a
meaning of healthy weight, fullness, and even prosperity.
Scarcity and Strength: In the past, food scarcity was more common.
Embonpoint indicated someone had access to enough food to be
well-nourished and even robust, which was a sign of health and well-being.
Social Status: A fuller figure could also suggest wealth and
social status. Manual labor was more prevalent, and a thin physique
might be associated with the working class. Someone with embonpoint
might not have had to engage in strenuous physical activity to survive.
Over time, perceptions of body image have shifted in France, as elsewhere.
Today, embonpoint can still be used in a neutral way, but it can also
have a slightly negative connotation, suggesting someone is overweight.
A more positive term for someone who is pleasantly plump might be
**rond(e) **(round).

"bien-portant", which can refer either to someone who is doing well
or (euphemistically) who is portly is even more positive.

Post by HenHanna
______________________________
The shift likely began sometime in the 19th century or even earlier.
Early Signs: By the 18th century, there's evidence of some
advocating for slimmer figures, particularly among the upper class. This
suggests a potential beginning of a shift.
постепенное изменение (postupannoe izmenenie) ( постепенное изменение is
the Russian for gradual change, there is no direct equivalent in English
but it conveys the idea of a slow shift over time)
While a precise date is elusive, the gradual change in perception
likely happened between the 18th and 20th centuries.
______________________________________
The American shift in perception happened largely around 1950's-1970's
(the fashion model Twiggy) (Audrey Hepburn)
Rise of "The Ideal Figure": The post-war era (post-WWII)
saw a boom in advertising and media. Images of thinness as the ideal
body type for women became increasingly prevalent. Fashion models like
Twiggy, known for her slender frame, became cultural icons.
Focus on Health and Fitness: There was a growing emphasis on
health and fitness during this period. Diet culture started to gain
momentum, with a focus on calorie counting and weight loss.
Shifting Standards of Beauty: Actresses like Audrey Hepburn,
known for her petite figure and gamine look, epitomized the new beauty
standard. These cultural influences significantly impacted how Americans
perceived healthy and attractive body types.
While there was certainly some body diversity before the 1950s, the
post-war era marked a more concentrated push towards a specific ideal of
thinness, particularly for women. This shift continues to influence
perceptions of weight in the US today.

[HenHanna]

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna

Embonpoint is apparently defined as persons who
are considered larger than usual.

I don't know about the English use, but in French it designates a

stomach larger than usual, typically at a male - the special rounded
shape that resembles a pregnant woman. -- Bertel Kolt, Denmark <<<
____________________________
[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France.
It literally translates to "in good point" and historically conveyed a
meaning of healthy weight, fullness, and even prosperity.
Scarcity and Strength: In the past, food scarcity was more common.
Embonpoint indicated someone had access to enough food to be
well-nourished and even robust, which was a sign of health and well-being.
Social Status: A fuller figure could also suggest wealth and
social status. Manual labor was more prevalent, and a thin physique
might be associated with the working class. Someone with embonpoint
might not have had to engage in strenuous physical activity to survive.
Over time, perceptions of body image have shifted in France, as elsewhere.
Today, embonpoint can still be used in a neutral way, but it can also
have a slightly negative connotation, suggesting someone is overweight.
A more positive term for someone who is pleasantly plump might be
**rond(e) **(round).

"bien-portant", which can refer either to someone who is doing well
or (euphemistically) who is portly is even more positive.

Thanks!

my trusty volume (Harrap's Shorter ..., 1982) is too recent
to provide anything insightful

for Embonpoint , it just has:

Stoutness, plumpness,

to be stout, corpulent, fat.

[Hibou]

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna
Over time, perceptions of body image have shifted in France, as elsewhere.
Today,  embonpoint can still be used in a neutral way, but it can also
have a slightly negative connotation, suggesting someone is overweight.
A more positive term for someone who is pleasantly plump might be
                            **rond(e)  **(round).

"bien-portant", which can refer either to someone who is doing well
or (euphemistically) who is portly is even more positive.

The word I seem to run across routinely in classic novels, generally
applied to bits of women (hands and arms), is 'potelé(e)' (plump). I
find this example in Sand:

« "N'est-il pas vrai, ma chère signora ?" ajouta-t-elle en
s'enhardissant jusqu'à presser doucement de sa /jolie main poteĺée/ le
bras languissant de Consuelo. » (My emphasis.)

And this one in Dumas:

« "Or", continua Aramis en prenant sur son fauteuil la même pose
gracieuse que s'il eût été dans une ruelle et en examinant avec
complaisance sa /main blanche et potelée/ comme une main de femme, qu’il
tenait en l’air pour en faire descendre le sang: "or...". »

(I'd forgotten this about Aramis. I was expecting the adjective to be
applied to the charming Constance Bonacieux.)

I can't see the word being adopted into English, though.

[occam]

Post by Hibou

Post by HenHanna
Over time, perceptions of body image have shifted in France, as elsewhere.
Today,  embonpoint can still be used in a neutral way, but it can
also have a slightly negative connotation, suggesting someone is
overweight.
A more positive term for someone who is pleasantly plump might be

                            **rond(e)  **(round).
<snip>

Post by Hibou
The word I seem to run across routinely in classic novels, generally
applied to bits of women (hands and arms), is 'potelé(e)' (plump).

"pudgy" if you want to be cruel.

<Aramis>

Post by Hibou
I can't see the word being adopted into English, though.

[HenHanna]

Post by HenHanna
[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France.

esp. for Children (?), as in the following Poem from 1537 (?) by Clément Marot


A une Damoyselle malade

Ma mignonne,
Je vous donne
Le bon jour;
Le séjour
C’est prison.
Guérison
Recouvrez,
Puis ouvrez
Votre porte
Et qu’on sorte
Vitement,
Car Clément
Le vous mande.
Va, friande
De ta bouche,
Qui se couche
En danger
Pour manger
Confitures;
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.



Je vous donne Le bon jour; <---- this is like [I send you my Greetings] ???

or more literally like [I'll give you (a gift of) a Good-Day] ???




Tu prendras, Et perdras L’embonpoint. (future Tense) (future Tense) ?

Meaning-wise, This [prendras, Et] seems unnecessary... Do you agree?

[Bebercito]

Post by HenHanna

Post by HenHanna
[embonpoint] was once a completely positive term in France.

esp. for Children (?), as in the following Poem from 1537 (?) by Clément Marot
A une Damoyselle malade
Ma mignonne,
Je vous donne
Le bon jour;
Le séjour
C’est prison.
Guérison
Recouvrez,
Puis ouvrez
Votre porte
Et qu’on sorte
Vitement,
Car Clément
Le vous mande.
Va, friande
De ta bouche,
Qui se couche
En danger
Pour manger
Confitures;
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.
Je vous donne Le bon jour; <---- this is like [I send you my Greetings] ???
or more literally like [I'll give you (a gift of) a Good-Day] ???
Tu prendras, Et perdras L’embonpoint. (future Tense) (future Tense) ?
Meaning-wise, This [prendras, Et] seems unnecessary... Do you agree?

No, because "tu prendras" and "tu perdras" don't go together. Actually, "Couleur fade
Tu prendras" is an anastrophe for "Tu prendras (une) couleur fade". Without the "Et",
the lines could be understood as "Tu prendras l'embonpoint et tu perdras l'embonpoint",
which is not the intended meaning.

[HenHanna]

Bebercito wrote: ...............

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.
Je vous donne Le bon jour; <---- this is like [I send you my Greetings] ???
or more literally like [I'll give you (a gift of) a Good-Day] ???

the various Eng. translations are all over the place on this.

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna
Tu prendras, Et perdras L’embonpoint. (future Tense) (future Tense) ?
Meaning-wise, This [prendras, Et] seems unnecessary... Do you agree?

No, because "tu prendras" and "tu perdras" don't go together. Actually, "Couleur fade
Tu prendras" is an anastrophe for "Tu prendras (une) couleur fade". Without the "Et",
the lines could be understood as "Tu prendras l'embonpoint et tu perdras l'embonpoint",
which is not the intended meaning.

thank you!!!! my go-to ref. (Handlist) has:

anastrophe: unusual arrangement of words or clauses within a sentence, often for poetic effect.

------- which (at first) was sometimes a SHOW-OFF...
Look here... I'm really writing this in Latin!



Anastrophe (a NA stro phe; G. "turning back") — Perversio; Reversio.

1. Kind of Hyperbaton: unusual arrangement of words or clauses
within a sentence, often for metrical convenience or poetic effect:

Yet I'll not shed her blood,
Nor scar that whiter skin of hers than snow.
(Othello, V, ii)


Quintilian would confine anastrophe to a transposition of two
words only, a pattern Puttenham mocks with "In my years lusty,
many a deed doughty did I."


2. Anadiplosis. See also Hysteron proteron.

[HenHanna]

Bebercito wrote:   ...............

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint.           <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.
Je vous donne Le bon jour;   <----   this is like  [I send you my
Greetings]  ???
                           or more literally like  [I'll give you (a
gift of) a Good-Day]  ???

                the various Eng. translations  are  all over the place
on this.

Post by Bebercito

Post by HenHanna
Tu prendras, Et perdras L’embonpoint.   (future Tense)   (future
Tense) ?
             Meaning-wise, This  [prendras, Et]  seems unnecessary...
Do you agree?

No, because "tu prendras" and "tu perdras" don't go together.
Actually, "Couleur fade
Tu prendras" is an anastrophe for "Tu prendras (une) couleur fade".
Without the "Et",
the lines could be understood as "Tu prendras l'embonpoint et tu perdras l'embonpoint",
which is not the intended meaning.

(that was waht i was getting)

anastrophe: unusual arrangement of words or clauses within a sentence,
often for poetic effect.
                  ------- which (at first) was sometimes a SHOW-OFF...
                            Look here... I'm really writing this in Latin!
Anastrophe (a NA stro phe; G. "turning back") — Perversio; Reversio.
1. Kind of Hyperbaton:     unusual arrangement of words or clauses
                         Yet I'll not shed her blood,
              Nor scar that whiter skin of hers than snow.
                                                       (Othello, V, ii)
Quintilian would confine anastrophe to a transposition of two
           words only, a pattern Puttenham mocks with "In my years lusty,
           many a deed doughty did I."
2. Anadiplosis.     See also Hysteron proteron.

"Couleur fade Tu prendras" is an anastrophe for
"Tu prendras (une) couleur fade".


"You will take on a dull color" or "You will become pale."



Depuis qu'elle a appris la mauvaise nouvelle, elle a pris une couleur
fade.

"Il a travaillé sans relâche ces derniers mois, et il commence à prendre
une couleur fade."

"La défaite de son équipe l'a laissé avec une couleur fade."


-------reminds me of the Bib.phrase------- His face fell.



the modern Anastrophic King (of course) is Churchill
(and possibly Yoda is)

[Peter Moylan]

Post by HenHanna
Bebercito wrote: ...............

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. Is this an archaic form of "doit"?

[HenHanna]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by HenHanna
Bebercito wrote: ...............

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. Is this an archaic form of "doit"?

i just assumed it was Subjunctive... --- as in: Thy kingdom come

or God save the Queen


My trusty book (paperback) [501 French Verbs]
has Donner (page 167) and has Subjunctives...

but i'm not seeing Doint

[HenHanna]

Post by HenHanna

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by HenHanna
Bebercito wrote: ...............

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. Is this an archaic form of "doit"?

i just assumed it was Subjunctive... --- as in: Thy kingdom come
or God save the Queen
My trusty book (paperback) [501 French Verbs]
has Donner (page 167) and has Subjunctives...
but i'm not seeing Doint

Found it!!!

https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/doint



(Désuet) Troisième personne du singulier du présent du subjonctif de
donner.

Or, prions Dieu qu'il leur doint paradis. — (J.-J.
Rousseau)



---------- So this is Tutoyer for God ?



"tutoyement" (informal address) and "vouvoiement" (formal address) in
French grammar


_____________________________


The verb "doint" in the sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" is actually
not a correct verb form in modern French. Here's the breakdown:

Original Phrase: "Dieu te doint Santé bonne"

Intended Verb: The intended verb was likely "donne" (conjugated form).


Explanation:

Outdated Conjugation: "Doint" is an outdated conjugation of the
verb "donner" (to give) in the third person singular form. In Old
French, "doint" was used for the second-person singular "tu" pronoun
(you).

Modern French: Modern French uses the verb "donner" and
conjugates it according to the pronoun. In this case, "te" (you)
requires the second-person singular conjugation, which is "donnes."
Corrected Sentence:

Modern French: "Dieu te donne Santé bonne"

_____________________________


Yes, your sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" uses the informal "tu"
pronoun ("te") when addressing God. This is interesting because in
French, traditionally, God was addressed with the formal "vous" pronoun
("vous").

Here's a breakdown of why things might have changed:

Historical Context: Traditionally, French used "vous" with God,
reflecting a sense of awe and respect.

Modern Shift: Over time, especially in Catholic prayers, "tu" has
become more common when addressing God. This shift reflects a more
personal and intimate relationship with the divine.




Is it always okay to use "tu" with God?

While "tu" is becoming more common, it's not universally accepted. Here
are some things to consider:

Denomination: Some denominations might be more traditional and prefer
"vous."
Context: In formal prayers or religious ceremonies, "vous" might still
be used.
Personal Preference: Ultimately, the choice depends on your own comfort
level and understanding of God.
Alternatives:

Here are some alternative ways to address God in French, depending on
the context:

Seigneur (Lord): This is a formal and respectful way to address God.

Mon Dieu (My God): This adds a personal touch while retaining respect.

Père (Father): Used in some Christian contexts to express a father-child
relationship with God.


Overall, your sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" is grammatically
correct using the informal "tu" with God. It reflects a more personal
way of addressing the divine. However, be mindful of the context and
your own beliefs when choosing how to speak to God in French.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by HenHanna

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by HenHanna
Bebercito wrote: ...............

Post by HenHanna
Si tu dures
Trop malade,
Couleur fade
Tu prendras,
Et perdras
L’embonpoint. <--------------
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. Is this an archaic form of "doit"?

Found it!!!
https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/doint
(Désuet) Troisième personne du singulier du présent du subjonctif de
donner.

Thanks. I was looking at the wrong verb (devoir). I see that I was right
about the "archaic", though.

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi HenHanna,

Post by HenHanna

Post by HenHanna
Et perdras
L’embonpoint.
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. >

https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/doint
(Désuet) Troisième personne du singulier du présent du subjonctif de
donner.
Or, prions Dieu qu'il leur doint paradis. — (J.-J. Rousseau)
          ----------   So this is   Tutoyer    for  God  ?

I am unsure the subjunctive form means using "tu". I would just read it
as "Que Dieu te donne une bonne santé, ma mignonne" or "Puisse Dieu te
donner une bonne santé, ma mignonne".

I confirm "doint" is no longer used in modern French. Some sort of an
old medieval form. I would also highlight the use of "doint" for the
rhyme with "embonpoint".

Post by HenHanna
"tutoyement" (informal address) and "vouvoiement" (formal address) in
French grammar

"tutoiement"

Post by HenHanna
Outdated Conjugation:      "Doint" is an outdated conjugation of the
verb "donner" (to give) in the third person singular form. In Old
French, "doint" was used for the second-person singular "tu" pronoun
(you).

Do you have a reference for the use of "doint" for the second-person
singular "tu"? I do not manage to find that explicit use.

https://www.littre.org/definition/donner

1. Donner faisait jadis au subjonctif, que je doin, que tu doins, qu'il
doint ; cette forme se trouve encore dans des auteurs du XVIIe siècle et
même du XVIIIe :
À tous époux Dieu doint pareille joie, La Fontaine, Diable.
Dieu te doint pour guerdon de tes œuvres si saintes…, Régnier, Sat. XII.
Or prions Dieu qu'il leur doint paradis, Rousseau J.-B. Épig. III, 24.

[HenHanna]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
Hi HenHanna,

Post by HenHanna

Post by HenHanna
Et perdras
L’embonpoint.
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

I've never seen "doint" before. >

https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/doint
(Désuet) Troisième personne du singulier du présent du subjonctif de
donner.
Or, prions Dieu qu'il leur doint paradis. — (J.-J. Rousseau)
           ----------   So this is   Tutoyer    for  God  ?

I am unsure the subjunctive form means using "tu".  I would just read it
as "Que Dieu te donne une bonne santé, ma mignonne" or "Puisse Dieu te
donner une bonne santé, ma mignonne".
I confirm "doint" is no longer used in modern French.  Some sort of an
old medieval form.  I would also highlight the use of "doint" for the
rhyme with "embonpoint".

Post by HenHanna
"tutoyement" (informal address) and "vouvoiement" (formal address) in
French grammar

"tutoiement"

Post by HenHanna
Outdated Conjugation:      "Doint" is an outdated conjugation of the
verb "donner" (to give) in the third person singular form. In Old
French, "doint" was used for the second-person singular "tu" pronoun
(you).

Do you have a reference for the use of "doint" for the second-person
singular "tu"?  I do not manage to find that explicit use.
  https://www.littre.org/definition/donner
1. Donner faisait jadis au subjonctif, que je doin, que tu doins, qu'il
doint ; cette forme se trouve encore dans des auteurs du XVIIe siècle et
À tous époux Dieu doint pareille joie, La Fontaine, Diable.
Dieu te doint pour guerdon de tes œuvres si saintes…, Régnier, Sat. XII.
Or prions Dieu qu'il leur doint paradis, Rousseau J.-B. Épig. III, 24.

hello... great to hear from you...
(this proves that...) Cross-posting is sometimes good or great.

Bard.Google.com seems to agree (with my hunch) that

Post by Julien ÉLIE

Post by HenHanna

Yes, your sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" uses

the informal "tu" pronoun ("te") when addressing God.

but now i'm totally unsure about my hunch.


_________________

Post by Julien ÉLIE
"Que Dieu te donne une bonne santé

that Que is interesting... the same Que as in

(Spanish) Qué tenga un buen fin de semana!

Qué tengan un buen [Bloomsday] everyone!

[Hibou]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
Hi HenHanna,
[...]

Post by HenHanna
Et perdras
L’embonpoint.
Dieu te doint
Santé bonne,
Ma mignonne.

hello...  great to hear from you...
(this proves that...) Cross-posting is sometimes good or great.
Bard.Google.com  seems to agree (with my hunch) that
        >>>   Yes, your sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" uses
              the informal "tu" pronoun ("te") when addressing God.
but now i'm totally unsure about my hunch.

I hesitate to disagree with a Bard, but IMHO the 'te' here addresses the
cute one who is the subject and recipient of the poem. There is no
direct address to God.

Dieu te donne santé bonne, ma mignonne.
God give you good health, my cute one.

(I suppose the last line counts as a /pious hope/.)

[Peter Moylan]

Post by HenHanna

Post by Julien ÉLIE
Hi HenHanna,

Post by HenHanna
Outdated Conjugation: "Doint" is an outdated conjugation of the
verb "donner" (to give) in the third person singular form. In Old
French, "doint" was used for the second-person singular "tu" pronoun
(you).

Do you have a reference for the use of "doint" for the second-person
singular "tu"? I do not manage to find that explicit use.

Anyone with even a moderate knowledge of French would expect "tu doins"
rather than "tu doint". Still, it's an easy mistake for a non-native
speaker to make, especially when discussing a form that's no longer in use.

Post by HenHanna
Bard.Google.com seems to agree (with my hunch) that

Post by Julien ÉLIE

Post by HenHanna

Post by HenHanna
Yes, your sentence "Dieu te doint Santé bonne" uses

the informal "tu" pronoun ("te") when addressing God.
but now i'm totally unsure about my hunch.

The "te" in that line is an *object* pronoun, and has nothing to do with
the subject "Dieu".

Bard.google.com sounds to me like an AI. Over here in alt.usage.english
we've seen plenty of evidence that statements by an AI cannot be
trusted. No doubt people in the other newsgroups have also noticed that.

Recent developments in AI technology have focused on getting output that
is _convincing_ rather than _correct_. I hope that Google is not
switching over to giving us plausible bullshit.

[Aidan Kehoe]

[...] Recent developments in AI technology have focused on getting output
that is _convincing_ rather than _correct_. I hope that Google is not
switching over to giving us plausible bullshit.

Something I’ve noticed in search that goes in the direction of plausible
bullshit is when I search for the manufacturers’ “Summary of Product
Characteristics” for a given medication, carefully using double quotes around
the medication name to look for that medication and only that medication, it
gives the SmPCs for medications used for the same indication, exactly what I
don’t want, since *I* am *already* most likely to confuse the side-effects and
contraindications of those meds

[Aidan Kehoe]

[...] Pronunciation of the letter r seems to vary wildly between languages. I
can do both alveolar and uvular r in most positions in a word, if I
concentrate, and that covers a fair few languages, but it does require
concentration. Certainly I can pronounce Irish dearg and déag so that
they sound different. The difficulty for me is more about hearing the
difference.

That’s a surprise to me. Can you pick up traces of an Irish accent among
Australians? This fellow: https://jamohanlon.com/science/ , for example, was on
Quirks and Quarks, a Canadian radio show I listen to via podcasts on long
drives, and his Australian has a lot more more post-vocalic Rs together with
the Northern Ireland [œʏ] for <ou>; if you can pick that up, you can hear the
difference.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/this-spider-scientist-wants-us-to-appreciate-the-world-s-8-legged-wonders-1.7358310
for the full broadcast.

I can also do a flapped r before a vowel, but to my great annoyance I am
unable to do any sort of trilled r. Exception: when singing the Edith Piaf song
with
the lines
Balayé les amours
Avec leurs trémolos
I do make an effort to do "trémolos" with an uvular trill, and sometimes
I succeed.

Great.

It took me, I think, a year, certainly many months, to get the alveolar trill
right. What worked for me was attempting to make a [h] at the same time as my
normal /r/ sound (while going on walks and in other contexts where no-one was
listening); this lowered the back of the tongue, which makes the anterior end
of the tongue more likely to trill, and eventually I could pronounce pero and
perro distinctly in Spanish without problems.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by Aidan Kehoe
It took me, I think, a year, certainly many months, to get the alveolar trill
right. What worked for me was attempting to make a [h] at the same time as my
normal /r/ sound (while going on walks and in other contexts where no-one was
listening); this lowered the back of the tongue, which makes the anterior end
of the tongue more likely to trill, and eventually I could pronounce pero and
perro distinctly in Spanish without problems.

I have a problem with that. I have to produce a hurricane to get my
tongue to vibrate. My daughter can do it with as little air as she
likes.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Aidan Kehoe

[...] Pronunciation of the letter r seems to vary wildly between
languages. I can do both alveolar and uvular r in most positions in
a word, if I concentrate, and that covers a fair few languages, but
it does require concentration. Certainly I can pronounce Irish
dearg and déag so that they sound different. The difficulty for me
is more about hearing the difference.

That’s a surprise to me. Can you pick up traces of an Irish accent
among Australians? This fellow: https://jamohanlon.com/science/ , for
example, was on Quirks and Quarks, a Canadian radio show I listen to
via podcasts on long drives, and his Australian has a lot more more
post-vocalic Rs together with the Northern Ireland [œʏ] for <ou>; if
you can pick that up, you can hear the difference.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/this-spider-scientist-wants-us-to-appreciate-the-world-s-8-legged-wonders-1.7358310

for the full broadcast.

Interesting example. I would have picked the first person as having an
Irish accent strongly modified by North American influences, and I
didn't pick "Canadian" until I re-read what you wrote. The second
speaker has to be an Irish person who has lived for a long time in
Australia. Yes, I can hear post-vocalic R from someone speaking English.
When it's someone speaking Irish, an extra factor comes in: my
vocabulary is so limited, and my command of Irish spelling so poor, that
I'm struggling to understand anything at all. Under those conditions, I
can fail to distinguish two words even though their pronunciation is
different.

There's also the fact that recognising an accent does not imply being
able to analyse the features of the words being spoken. I used to live
in Melbourne, at a time when it had many recent immigrants, and when I
was in a crowd -- on a railway station, for example -- it amused me to
guess which languages people were speaking. I think those guesses would
have been very accurate. These were languages that I didn't speak or
understand, but I could pick them because different languages have
different rhythms and dominant sounds, and one can respond to that
without knowing what any of the words mean. A lot of what registers is
subconscious.

Here's another example. I once got lost in central Paris at midnight, so
I stopped a passer-by and asked for directions. He told me where to go,
I thanked him, and we went in our different directions. It wasn't until
I had walked a whole block more that it suddenly hit me that that man
had been speaking French with an Australian accent. The recognition was
in my head, but it hadn't come to the surface. And he, presumably,
hadn't noticed that I was an English speaker.

[Aidan Kehoe]

[...] When it's someone speaking Irish, an extra factor comes in: my
vocabulary is so limited, and my command of Irish spelling so poor, that I'm
struggling to understand anything at all. Under those conditions, I can fail
to distinguish two words even though their pronunciation is different.

OK, so no deep-rooted lack of perception, “just” a deficit in practice.

There's also the fact that recognising an accent does not imply being
able to analyse the features of the words being spoken. I used to live
in Melbourne, at a time when it had many recent immigrants, and when I
was in a crowd -- on a railway station, for example -- it amused me to
guess which languages people were speaking. I think those guesses would
have been very accurate. These were languages that I didn't speak or
understand, but I could pick them because different languages have
different rhythms and dominant sounds, and one can respond to that
without knowing what any of the words mean. A lot of what registers is
subconscious.

Yeah, I get you, but I do think this can be leveraged to pick up on phonemic
distinctions when learning another language.

Here's another example. I once got lost in central Paris at midnight, so
I stopped a passer-by and asked for directions. He told me where to go,
I thanked him, and we went in our different directions. It wasn't until
I had walked a whole block more that it suddenly hit me that that man
had been speaking French with an Australian accent. The recognition was
in my head, but it hadn't come to the surface. And he, presumably,
hadn't noticed that I was an English speaker.

Clearly the French of both of you was good enough for the task to hand, no bad
thing.