 |
| Say it, over and over, then try B |
Following my first cancer op a twenty-minute chat with easily the most lustrous speech therapist in the West Midlands convinced me I needed to know more about the spoken word.
I’ve written for a living but writing is – or should be – an organised craft. Speaking tends to be impromptu, of course, but a disastrous and unfortunately memorable jumble of phrases I uttered as a bridegroom taught me to depend on the agility of my typing fingers rather than the false glitter of my thoughts when addressing multitudes.
Speech should be distinct. With many people this is not the case. Some mumble, thinking they sound casual; more often they are incoherent. Others tell jokes, unaware that the build-up may be as important as the punchline. Others “er” and “um”, the sound of a mind thrashing in neutral.
As with singing so with speech, consonants are as important as vowels. Words should make use of all their letters, not fade into oblivion. Watching someone read sentences compiled to aid speech therapy it’s amazing the way the lips flutter quickly from one sound shape to another. Lips are powered by muscles, when those muscles weaken the speech is slurred.
Tongue twisters teach us that what our speaking apparatus wants to say may not be what’s written. Even short ones: “She sells sea-shells by the sea-shore.” Note how we are tempted to insert an “h” into “sells”. Sure, you can work out why, but tell that to that free spirit your tongue.
Some therapies require us to junk our instincts. Out in the hurly-burly January becomes “Jan-yew-ry”; under the therapist’s watchful eyes and ears it takes all four syllables “Jan-u-a-ry”. That might seempedantic but certain words profit from this form of aural resurrection: for instance, where does the “h” go in “vehemently”?
That h goes into the bin with all the other silent letters, including, as far as I’m concerned, one of the double t’s in letters. Wikipedia says silent letters can be empty letters - or they may be inert letters. And a whole lot more.
ReplyDeleteMikeM: It's a nice thought (ie, ditching superfluous letters) but it doesn't allow for the fact that we we don't spell out words we read, letter by letter, we recognise their shape. And this becomes even more important in languages which give their nouns genders and thereby force adjectives, adverbs, etc, to "agree" (via the medium of different endings) with the word they are qualifying.
ReplyDeleteBlame the US. In the bright new dawn of a revolution achieved you were at the edge of rationalising the spelling of English and yet you punked out with the job only a quarter done. Oh how I used to enjoy myself when, surrounded by a slew of putative US journalists, I had them saying "shedule" instead of "skedule" and cursing me for the evil influence I exerted.
In my working life I had to give talks and lectures. I studied how others successfully did it. "Slow it down" soon bcame obvious.
ReplyDeleteThe best lecturer I have had the priviledge of listening to was Jacob Bronowski in his TV series "The Ascent of Man". No one else has seemed to use the stdied pause to better effect. You hung, waiting for that next phrase.
General conversation is, of course, a different kettle of fish. But slowing speech down a little gives a chance to listen to the response and body language of the addressed.
"stdied " should be "studied of course....
ReplyDeleteAvus: Yes, the tendency is to address an audience at reading speed. Slower, by all means, but not "slow". There's a danger of it sounding like a dirge; also the natural cadences break up and all rhythm is lost. In any case, there's another option; maintain normal speed but pause slightly longer between sentences. And make this work for you.
ReplyDeleteOn a press visit to Japan I spoke to a group of about fifty: twenty journalists from all over Europe, the rest Japanese businessmen. Naturally an interpreter was involved (not least when when I broke into carefully researched Japanese). Theoretically, the interruptions for interpretation could have proved a tedious sequence of distractions but I'd recognised this and made sure I ended each of my English sessions with an unresolved situation; leaving them wanting more. I felt sorry for the other journalists since they were all required to speak English and were at a disadvantage. My advantage was reflected in the level of applause I was accorded but it was like shooting fish in a barrel. Good communication also lies in the way we handle the subject.
Yes Bronowski was good but he had great show-and-tells in The Ascent of Man (especially in the final scene at the concentration camp). To my mind he was even better back in the b&w TV days on Sunday afternoons, doing The Brains Trust up against such fast bowlers as Freddie Ayer and Bertrand Russel all of them just sitting in easy chairs and talking about difficult stuff. Technically Bronowski's high-pitched voice should have been against him in such a gruff company but his squeaks of passion (and laughter) were among his assets.
A PS to my Japanese experience. The translator was a handsome woman who was also principal secretary to the company's MD. The MD came over to me afterwards and said, in halting but good-sport English, "Translating your Japanese was the hardest work my secretary has ever done." Preparation pays off. I'd spent an hour trying to get it right in a cooling bath at my hotel room. Also I reduced my notes to tiny squares of paper; the Financial Times noticed this and had wondered. No doubt others had too. Just be fascinating, whatever it takes.
Sounds like your preparation for that event was worth it.When i talked to prospective instructors I emphasised the "six Ps".
ReplyDeleteProper Preparation Prevents Piss-Poor Performance.
I wonder why the h was ever there in vehemently to begin with. But it occurred to me it would then be spelled veemently. Now I wonder if that's why it's there? Probably not.
ReplyDeleteAs for schedule, pronouncing it with the hard k sound gives it substance and power. You know I'm right. Shedule? Passive at best. Looking forward to your response.
Colette; Learn the phonetic symbols and you'll be able to answer your own question about vehemently. See my next post with reference to more on this subject.
ReplyDelete