That's not how you're supposed to pronounce it. There's not even an 'f" in the word.
shareThat is how it is pronounced in Britain. That isn't an opinion, it is a fact. Yes, it is not spelled that way. It is a feature of English (American, British, or other variants) that its spelling is irregular.
share"That's not how you're supposed to pronounce it."
Quite ironic when Americans suddenly want to educate the world about English.......
Because the Old French spelling "luef" for the Modern French "lieu" looked like an English "f"
shareYep, it's a brit thing. Same as calling maam "mom". They have a bunch of confusing sounds in their language for us Yanks.
shareUltimately, people who speak the same language, but are separated by some distance, will see the form and pronunciation of words change. Neither is right or wrong.
People like to say that Americans have ruined English because the British don't speak the way Americans do. But the British have numerous accents within the islands and, if you think any of them use and pronounce the language like they did in 1776 (or the 1600s or whenever) you are kidding yourself.
I was actually having a conversation about this the other day. I think, if you were a time traveler, that you could still get by pretty good in the 1700s. But you might be at a loss in the 1600s. And I base that strictly off books published from the eras. How the language was actually spoken I have no idea.
shareModern time travellers would probably be OK until about 1600, although it would be difficult to communicate they would be able to do so, before then they would start having problems due to the 'great vowel shift' which occurred in the 16th century and which changed Middle (medieval) English to early Modern English.
share"Neither is right or wrong. "
Disagree. Those who divert from proper spelling are wrong. See: Ebonics.
You seem not to understand how languages naturally change over time. American English and British English have been evolving away from each other for four hundred years. It is normal and natural.
I will agree that "forcing" a language to change is problematic. But that is not what is happening here.
Consider color vs colour
theater vs theatre
or differences in the words used to refer to the same thing
for instance elevator vs lift
hood vs bonnet
trunk vs boot
In this case the "f" that the British use in lieutenant traces back to the words etymology from the French.There are various theories regarding it. Whichever you like the British use the f. Americans do not. Neither is wrong in their own countries.
I understand the unfortunate drift by not having the populace know the language properly, resulting in change spelling.
shareExactly.
shareWhat complete and utter nonsense. If you are so concerned about language drift please start using 16th century spelling and grammar. If you don't then you must be a hypocrite because British English exhibits your "unfortunate drift by not having the populace know the language properly, result in change spelling." And by the way the last phrase should read "resulting in changed spelling."
Really, if you are that concerned, please start speaking in Proto-Afro-Asiatic.
Please learn something about basic linguistics.
Actually i speak Baltic which is older than English of any kind so thanks but im good.
shareYou seem to have missed the point. (or perhaps you are being purposely obtuse). If you are speaking Baltic you are, by your definition, speaking a language that has resulted from people not teaching their children to speak properly. Baltic is not as old as proto-Afro-Asiatic. So, to be true to your principals, you should be speaking that. (of course, proto-Afro-Asiatic is not necessarily the first language either.)
The point, of course, is all languages change over time. The Baltic you speak has done so as have ALL languages, without exception. It is normal and natural and has nothing to do with lazy teaching.
Thanks.Finally a centered voice of reason.
shareWe Aussies and Brits call "mom", mum, not maam.
shareYep... because it's (that is, English) is our language. Funny that.
share Same as calling maam "mom"
wait, what ?
Who does that?
It's because they speak English and not American English?
Isn't this one obvious?
Funny you should say that because I also wondered about it, but unlike you, I got all my answers from Wikipedia.
shareOn a similar note, I didn't notice when I watched it, but it seems that "schedule" was pronounced the American way ("skedule") in the movie, instead of the British way ("shedule"). The American pronunciation is gaining ground in Britain today, but in 1917 it would have been unthinkable for a British soldier to say "skedule".
Interesting I never picked up on that. I´m Australian, and have always pronounced it "skedule" but I know a lot of older Aussies pronounce it the British way.
shareIt would also have been unlikely for a soldier to salute an officer with his hat off, and for an officer to refer to NCOs several times as 'gentlemen' (the rank and file of the British Army are not referred to as gentlemen, even if they ARE gentlemen).
Most of the dialogue was written and spoken as a modern Englishman would speak it, not as someone in 1917.