Pastelland Forum

The Abacus wrote:But do you remember how to pronounce his name correctly?

I do, that extra "s" is what I had trouble with XD

Its like "Ush"
Or to be a bit more helpful, like the sound affect "Woosh". But without the W, and with only the "oosh" sound. But you have to take the first O out and replace it with a U.

"Ush".

Mach-Ter-Ush.

WorldisQuiet5256 wrote:Its like "Ush"
Or to be a bit more helpful, like the sound affect "Woosh". But without the W, and with only the "oosh" sound. But you have to take the first O out and replace it with a U.

"Ush".

Mach-Ter-Ush.

That would be a "Matulom" then.

OnyxIonVortex wrote:actually the correct plural is Mateuszowie, according to the Wiktionary.

'Mateusze' could be an option as well, yes. -<owie> is a masculine personal plural suffix used for certain nouns, mostly professions, some family members, etc.

interesting, thanks!

ElodinTheArcane wrote:i think its mateuszes

Yes. Unless you want to do the very English thing of using the plural of the native Polish which would be Mateuszowie or Mateusze, pronounced /ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɔ.vʲɛ/ and /ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɛ/ respectively, if I am not mistaken. /ma.'tɛ.uʂ̻/ being the pronunciation of the singular. (Not /mɑːx.'tɛ.uʃ/ as I've tried to explain to WiQ, but he apparently refuses to believe me.)

How an Anglophone would Anglicize the pronunciation is of course another thing. Unless you want to go full erasure of nationality, you don't want to call Mateusz Matthew. You'll choose something like /mɑ.'tɛi.əs/ or something or something. In which case the correct plural is /mɑ.'tɛi.ə.sɨz/ spelled Mateuszes. And if you insist on the correct pronunciation of Mateusz, the English plural will still be /ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɨz/, because the plural suffix takes that form whenever preceded by a sibilant, which /ʂ̻/ definitely is.

that's something that bugs me about English, it sometimes uses the native plural forms, mostly for Latin and Greek words, and they end up sounding weird.
(but that may be because I'm used to "s"-plurals because of my Spanish background )

Anteroinen wrote: /ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɔ.vʲɛ/
/ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɛ/
/ma.'tɛ.uʂ̻/
/mɑːx.'tɛ.uʃ/
/mɑ.'tɛi.əs/
/mɑ.'tɛi.ə.sɨz/
/ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɨz/

Dude, you're abusing the phonemic transcription so much - if you're talking about how a world is pronounced, transcribing it with all the secondary articulations and prosody and stuff, you'd usually go for the [ ] brackets, phonetic transcription, instead of the / / ones. I mean, in Polish, <Mateusz> is /mateuʂ/ while it is also [ma'tɛ.uʂ̻] or often [ma'tɛ.wuʂ̻] since Poles can't really do vowel hiatuses so yeah

Vurn wrote:

Anteroinen wrote: /ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɔ.vʲɛ/
/ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɛ/
/ma.'tɛ.uʂ̻/
/mɑːx.'tɛ.uʃ/
/mɑ.'tɛi.əs/
/mɑ.'tɛi.ə.sɨz/
/ma.'tɛu.ʂ̻ɨz/

Dude, you're abusing the phonemic transcription so much - if you're talking about how a world is pronounced, transcribing it with all the secondary articulations and prosody and stuff, you'd usually go for the [ ] brackets, phonetic transcription, instead of the / / ones. I mean, in Polish, <Mateusz> is /mateuʂ/ while it is also [ma'tɛ.uʂ̻] or often [ma'tɛ.wuʂ̻] since Poles can't really do vowel hiatuses so yeah

Yeah, I'm kind of a badboy like that. Good to know about [ma'tɛ.wuʂ̻] I wondered about what you'd do there.

Seriosly, what does Mateusz think about this discussion? XD