In that persons comment, they removed several “silent” e’s, but all but one changed the word’s pronunciation. I was talking about them. Like the E in hate. It doesn’t make a sound itself, so isn’t it still silent?
It’s not silent, but in the wrong place. Haet would be more correct, as it changes the pronunciation from [hæt] to [heɪt]. Hait might be an even better way to write it (see also: bait, maid, laid etc.)
English is three languages wearing a trench coat and pretending to be one.
I just now realized that the word “trench” is in “trench coat”.
[…] heavy-duty fabric,[1] originally developed for British Army officers before the First World War, and becoming popular while used in the trenches, hence the name trench coat.
They work like an e after a vowel, making it a long vowel, but with a letter in between. They have absolutely no reason to exist as haet is pronounced the same as hate but has the letters in a more logical order.
You linked a diffent word. However, a quick google shows that the Brits and Americans pronounce it like you are saying. Over here in aus I’ve only heard it pronounced the way I said it was pronounced.
If ther’s on thing I hat, it’s words ending with silent e’s. And whil we’r at it, we ned to get rid of doubl e’s as well.
Dubl e’s mak sens thou. Ther’s a diffrenc between feed and fed, or between need and Ned. The dublin maks the E longer.
No, the doublin makes the [e] into [i:].
So we should write fiid and niid then? In German, if you wanted a word that’s pronounced like the English need, you’d write nied.
Anyhow, just removing the second e without replacement would not help in knowing how to pronounce the word by reading it.
I don’t mind silent e’s, they do actually change the way words are pronounced at least.
Magic Es they taught them to me as. Come to think of it as an adult a magic e could mean something entirely different…
If they are silent, they don’t chang the pronunciaton, becaus if they do they are not silent.
In that persons comment, they removed several “silent” e’s, but all but one changed the word’s pronunciation. I was talking about them. Like the E in hate. It doesn’t make a sound itself, so isn’t it still silent?
It’s not silent, but in the wrong place. Haet would be more correct, as it changes the pronunciation from [hæt] to [heɪt]. Hait might be an even better way to write it (see also: bait, maid, laid etc.)
English is a weird language.
English is three languages wearing a trench coat and pretending to be one.
I just now realized that the word “trench” is in “trench coat”.
[…] heavy-duty fabric,[1] originally developed for British Army officers before the First World War, and becoming popular while used in the trenches, hence the name trench coat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_coat
I don’t get it - what about “trench” being in “trench coat” …?
They work like an e after a vowel, making it a long vowel, but with a letter in between. They have absolutely no reason to exist as haet is pronounced the same as hate but has the letters in a more logical order.
haet would be pronounced “heat” like in “haemoglobin” and “haematoma”
The ae in haemoglobin is pronounced like the a-e in hate.
No. ˈhē-mə-ˌglō-bən https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hemoglobin#medicalDictionary
You linked a diffent word. However, a quick google shows that the Brits and Americans pronounce it like you are saying. Over here in aus I’ve only heard it pronounced the way I said it was pronounced.