Hello, Vladimir, this combination has not yet been codified in major pronunciation dictionaries, perhaps due to the narrowness of its use outside technical areas; therefore, we should resort to analogy. Thus, acronyms of a similar type

It's true that a low-level student may just need to begin to speak; I encourage you to find someone to talk with. Skype may provide a nice forum for speaking, but I'm not familiar with it. Naturally, we usually don't correct a

O, I thought you were, as your quote is in Chinese. Yes, L(x) is a function indicating whether a language is 'native' or 'foreign' to a person. It is not restricted to Language Acquisition though, as it is widely used in such topics as

Hi, Why is it that Americans pronounce "Nike" (the brand) as /naiki/, while here in Argentina we pronounce it just /naik/ (without the final /i/ sound)? I don't know, so let's guess. Perhaps Americans, with /naiki/, feel they should give it

Pieanne wrote: Maybe "basicly" became "basically" for the sake of pronounciation, and by analogy with the other -ally adverbs? There may be a better reason, though, but I don't know it. Bonne journee, Pieanne! I thought so too, for

Hypercorrection is -a construction or pronunciation produced by mistaken analogy with standard usage out of a desire to be correct, as in the substitution of I for me in on behalf of my parents and I. -the production of such a construction

Hi Demicjusz (whom I call 'Demi' not because I thought you were female, but because the combination of vowels in your suffix are difficult to remember and copy down), No excuses, no analogies-- I just incorporate what sounds I seem to remember

Thanks for having a go, Mr M. Well, I'm afraid I have no idea how well you did I'm not surprised about 'lei' in 3 (I see a parallel with 'Venezuela'), but as for 5, I expected 'ge:'. In 4, why 'g' rather than sound heard in 'gem'? Any

On the other hand, I say "covert" to rhyme with "overt": "coe vert". Not like "cover" plus "t". Another victory for speak-as-you-spell. But I spell "covert" like "cover" plus

That's about 1:4. I got different results, though: "didn't use to" site:.uk 566 "didn't used to" site:.uk 941 which is roughly 1:2. It's still groanworthy, though. Many, many webpages of UK origin do not have a