TenPoundHammer wrote:Now you know how I feel. I've been trying to get on Wheel since Thanksgiving 2009, and I get more than a little peeved when I see an especially derpy contestant or three onstage. Or one whom I know was at an audition that I attended. Or both.
For the record, I was at a Wheelmobile event in Jacksonville a couple weeks ago, and they DID call my name. I solved "disposable razor" and got a cutout of the Wheelmobile. I'm sure I'll get invited to the second-level audition, which you have to pass to get on the show. It'll be my third time getting that far, so I'm hoping third time's the charm.
When you pass 40 tests for various shows without ever getting the call, we'll talk level of frustration.
Your profile pic would seem to indicate that you've had at least one opportunity.
Opportunity yes, call no.
Got 94% on that test and no call, so I crashed the gates and they were stuck with me
aeq5006 wrote:I wonder how much of the unused clues was due to Alex. After the triple neg on Etheridge, he spent a rather long time belaboring the fact that the contestants had been close.
No one attempted a response on the Etheridge clue.
Yeah, I got it confused with "One Last Kiss".
davey wrote:
CailinGaoilge wrote:
aeq5006 wrote:
Doesn't the "should rhyme" category name imply that they don't? Both "solar/scholar" and the example he gave did rhyme.
And did Alex say "lifeboy" rather than "lifebuoy"?
'Scholar' has a short o, 'solar' a long o. No rhyme.
Nor do silo and kilo, Alex's example. Not even close.
You people really need to look up "rhyme" in a dictionary.
Woof wrote:
In my state of residence, I have to put up with pronunciations of Peru as "PAY-roo" and Pulaski as "PULL-as-kie." And there's also the New MAD-rid fault.
Huh? Other than the accent on the first syllable, that is the correct pronunciation of "Peru".
German chocolate cake is actually named after someone named "German", so I wonder whether his name was pronounced with a soft or hard g, and if hard, whether "German chocolate cake" should also be pronounced with a hard g.
What's the delay between auditions and taping, and tape and air for J! and WoF?
I wouldn't find "lifeboy" as note worthy if it hadn't been a photo clue and thus the contestants/audience solely dependent on Alex's reading of the clue.
worldwidewebster wrote:
Not to mention the pronunciation used in A Christmas Story, which is the only time I've ever heard of Lifebuoy soap. (Does it actually still exist?)
Can you really trust a movie that doesn't know how to pronounce fragile correctly?
How was that not correct, it was the French pronunciation.
aeq5006 wrote:
Doesn't the "should rhyme" category name imply that they don't? Both "solar/scholar" and the example he gave did rhyme.
And did Alex say "lifeboy" rather than "lifebuoy"?
'Scholar' has a short o, 'solar' a long o. No rhyme.
[/quote]
Nor do silo and kilo, Alex's example. Not even close.[/quote]
aeq5006 wrote:You people really need to look up "rhyme" in a dictionary.
Or here's an idea, if you're serious. Look up those 2 pairs of words in a dictionary and see if the pronunciation marks for the accented first syllables match...
hbomb1947 wrote:Instaget FJ and I would have been surprised it was a sole get if it weren't for what transpired in the game prior to FJ. It had to be Washington by default, and knowing the dates when Presidents served has long been one of the basic preparation items for J! contestants.
I'll be the boardie to make the obligatory comment that this was not an easy game to watch for someone who is currently in the contestant pool. And it's another game that triggers the thought: What kind of a world are we living in where you get a game like this one, and yet some other contestants have to face a Matt Jackson or an Alex Jacob?
Have you tried shouting at the television, "Goddammit, Maggie, why aren't you calling me?" I did that almost every weeknight for about a month, and then I got the call. (Not from Maggie, but that's just a quibble.) It couldn't be just coincidence, could it? Good luck!
(WARNING: If you're married, your spouse might get tired of the yelling and cursing.)
I have been shouting at my tv for years. The maic has not worked for me so far.
LHamilton wrote:I think "foilage" is wrong because it transposes the "i" and "l". If it were FJ and a contestant wrote down "foilage" it would definitely be wrong. I'd bet "FO-lij" would be acceptable, even if the three-syllable pronunciation is more common.
This is exactly (almost verbatim) what it says at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foliage: The pronunciation \ˈfȯi-lij\ is disapproved because it suggests the transposition of the l and i in the spelling. It is not as common as \ˈfō-lij\ and may be associated with the nonstandard spelling foilage.
I think the judges got this one exactly right.
But that pronunciation note comes at the end of an entry that lists "FOI-lij" as the third pronunciation. Overall, given the way J! errs on the side of acceptance, I'd say that entry supports a reversal of the judges' decision. Merriam-Webster is the only dictionary I can find that offers even that much support. Still, given the long history of metathesis in the English language, I can see arguing that "foilage" is a regional variant and should be accepted by someone who is obviously from that region.
Not quite, my finely feathered flightless friend. M-W correctly perceives their role as descriptive, to list the disapproved-of pronunciations at the end of the list. M-W's note about the common misspelling 'foilage' confirms the unacceptability, for J! purposes. Certainly by virtue of letter order/confusability /FO-lij/ would have been acceptable too.
Similarly, who will be the first contestant to be negged for (the very common wrong mispronunciation) 'marscapone'? J! Archive shows out of five instances (in 30 years) the word has been located in the clue 4/5 and the 5th was a TS for MASCARPONE.
Woof wrote:
In my state of residence, I have to put up with pronunciations of Peru as "PAY-roo" and Pulaski as "PULL-as-kie." And there's also the New MAD-rid fault.
Huh? Other than the accent on the first syllable, that is the correct pronunciation of "Peru".
Correct in which language is the question. In English, it gets a short e sound and accent on the second syllable; in Spanish, it gets the long a sound and accent on the second syllable. In neither language is this pronunciation correct, and spoken with the requisite Southern twang it does set my teeth on edge.
LHamilton wrote:I think "foilage" is wrong because it transposes the "i" and "l". If it were FJ and a contestant wrote down "foilage" it would definitely be wrong. I'd bet "FO-lij" would be acceptable, even if the three-syllable pronunciation is more common.
This is exactly (almost verbatim) what it says at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foliage: The pronunciation \ˈfȯi-lij\ is disapproved because it suggests the transposition of the l and i in the spelling. It is not as common as \ˈfō-lij\ and may be associated with the nonstandard spelling foilage.
I think the judges got this one exactly right.
But that pronunciation note comes at the end of an entry that lists "FOI-lij" as the third pronunciation. Overall, given the way J! errs on the side of acceptance, I'd say that entry supports a reversal of the judges' decision. Merriam-Webster is the only dictionary I can find that offers even that much support. Still, given the long history of metathesis in the English language, I can see arguing that "foilage" is a regional variant and should be accepted by someone who is obviously from that region.
Not quite, my finely feathered flightless friend. M-W correctly perceives their role as descriptive, to list the disapproved-of pronunciations at the end of the list. M-W's note about the common misspelling 'foilage' confirms the unacceptability, for J! purposes. Certainly by virtue of letter order/confusability /FO-lij/ would have been acceptable too.
Similarly, who will be the first contestant to be negged for (the very common wrong mispronunciation) 'marscapone'? J! Archive shows out of five instances (in 30 years) the word has been located in the clue 4/5 and the 5th was a TS for MASCARPONE.
Oh my god, this one drives me crazy. Marscapone, marscapone; everybody but everybody says it wrong. Chefs on those TV cooking shows almost all say marscapone. Gong! Disqualified! If you can't say your food, you're out, damnit. What's hard about looking at a word and pronouncing it the way it's spelled, particularly from a romance language, which have very few pronunciation anomalies. Basalmic drives me nuts too, but not like marscapone.
Plus, it's an interesting point; would they count it wrong? And if not, what is the distinction?
El Jefe wrote:Similarly, who will be the first contestant to be negged for (the very common wrong mispronunciation) 'marscapone'? J! Archive shows out of five instances (in 30 years) the word has been located in the clue 4/5 and the 5th was a TS for MASCARPONE.
Now that everyone knows it's Revelation and the acting brothers are the Hemsworths, maybe mascarpone can be their next trap clue. Or maybe they've already found it in foliage.
bomtr wrote:Basalmic drives me nuts too, but not like marscapone.
I think I've heard "baslamic" too. Thousands of people have written it that way on the internet, so some of them must say it that way too -- just like foilage.
[quote="davey"]
[quote="aeq5006"]You people really need to look up "rhyme" in a dictionary.
[/quote]
Or here's an idea, if you're serious. Look up those 2 pairs of words in a dictionary and see if the pronunciation marks for the accented first syllables match...[/quote]
I have already made it quite clear that the dispute lies not in whether the words satisfy your criterion for "rhyme", but rather whether your criterion for "rhyme" is the proper one. Your failure to grasp this simple concept is baffling, and your posting a response that simply ignores what I said is highly disrespectful. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about the concept of "Insisting that someone else is wrong, based on premises they have made clear they reject, does nothing to convince them of anything other than you're a jerk."
aeq5006 wrote:You people really need to look up "rhyme" in a dictionary.
Or here's an idea, if you're serious. Look up those 2 pairs of words in a dictionary and see if the pronunciation marks for the accented first syllables match...
I have already made it quite clear that the dispute lies not in whether the words satisfy your criterion for "rhyme", but rather whether your criterion for "rhyme" is the proper one. Your failure to grasp this simple concept is baffling, and your posting a response that simply ignores what I said is highly disrespectful. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about the concept of "Insisting that someone else is wrong, based on premises they have made clear they reject, does nothing to convince them of anything other than you're a jerk."
Eh?
The words you pointed to do not rhyme according to anyone's definition, and most importantly by official sources, ie dictionaries.
aeq5006 wrote:You people really need to look up "rhyme" in a dictionary.
Or here's an idea, if you're serious. Look up those 2 pairs of words in a dictionary and see if the pronunciation marks for the accented first syllables match...
I have already made it quite clear that the dispute lies not in whether the words satisfy your criterion for "rhyme", but rather whether your criterion for "rhyme" is the proper one. Your failure to grasp this simple concept is baffling, and your posting a response that simply ignores what I said is highly disrespectful. I really don't see what's so hard to understand about the concept of "Insisting that someone else is wrong, based on premises they have made clear they reject, does nothing to convince them of anything other than you're a jerk."
You didn't make anything clear, but I will guess that you think - or want to argue - that because the last syllables of the words are identical, they rhyme. If a dictionary definition makes you think so, it's inadequate.
The words you pointed to do not rhyme according to anyone's definition, and most importantly by official sources, ie dictionaries.
And there's no need for ad hominem attacks.
Heh. I noticed that I had blocked the poster you are responding to. I thought to myself, "I wonder why." By the end of his/her post I said, "Oh, yeah."
In literary lingo, the words in question are not "perfect rhymes". They are, however, "slant rhymes" or "imperfect rhymes". It's a philosophical question whether that makes them a sort of rhyme by definition or something less than a rhyme by definition. So I'd say it's not correct to say they aren't rhymes "according to anyone's definition." But it's also not correct to say that they obviously are.
Whichever way you land, it's undeniable that slant rhyme has been employed in rhyming poetry since before Shakespeare.
Verdict: You're both partially right but claiming to be absolutely right, which makes you both wrong. CailinGaoilge wins the argument by decision for showing superior civility.
davey wrote:You didn't make anything clear, but I will guess that you think - or want to argue - that because the last syllables of the words are identical, they rhyme. If a dictionary definition makes you think so, it's inadequate.
That reminds me of a third category in addition to perfect rhymes and slant rhymes. Eye rhymes. These are words that don't rhyme when spoken but appear to be rhyming when spelled. I tried to find some good poetic examples on the web, but there's just a lot of nonsense out there. Stone and gone should NOT be called eye rhymes. Slant rhyme is the proper designation. They almost rhyme but not quite. "Eye rhyme" should be reserved for words that don't rhyme at all, even as slant rhymes. Bough and tough are eye rhymes. Slaughter and laughter are on the borderline. They'd work as a very loose slant rhyme but could be considered as not rhyming at all.
davey wrote:You didn't make anything clear, but I will guess that you think - or want to argue - that because the last syllables of the words are identical, they rhyme. If a dictionary definition makes you think so, it's inadequate.
That reminds me of a third category in addition to perfect rhymes and slant rhymes. Eye rhymes. These are words that don't rhyme when spoken but appear to be rhyming when spelled. I tried to find some good poetic examples on the web, but there's just a lot of nonsense out there. Stone and gone should NOT be called eye rhymes. Slant rhyme is the proper designation. They almost rhyme but not quite. "Eye rhyme" should be reserved for words that don't rhyme at all, even as slant rhymes. Bough and tough are eye rhymes. Slaughter and laughter are on the borderline. They'd work as a very loose slant rhyme but could be considered as not rhyming at all.
In other words, what the entire category we are debating is! "WORDS THAT SHOULD RHYME" = "eye rhyme"
"Jeopardy! is two parts luck and one part luck" - Me
"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings
The words you pointed to do not rhyme according to anyone's definition, and most importantly by official sources, ie dictionaries.
And there's no need for ad hominem attacks.
Heh. I noticed that I had blocked the poster you are responding to. I thought to myself, "I wonder why." By the end of his/her post I said, "Oh, yeah."
In literary lingo, the words in question are not "perfect rhymes". They are, however, "slant rhymes" or "imperfect rhymes". It's a philosophical question whether that makes them a sort of rhyme by definition or something less than a rhyme by definition. So I'd say it's not correct to say they aren't rhymes "according to anyone's definition." But it's also not correct to say that they obviously are.
Whichever way you land, it's undeniable that slant rhyme has been employed in rhyming poetry since before Shakespeare.
Verdict: You're both partially right but claiming to be absolutely right, which makes you both wrong. CailinGaoilge wins the argument by decision for showing superior civility.
The OP used the word rhyme and referred us to the dictionary, so it's reasonable to assume we're not talking about a separate term or concept. However some of the definitions I have seen, like
"Identity of the terminal sounds in lines of verse or in words," are not helpful. The matter of stress is ignored.