PTravel
Senior Senior Member
For the most part, no, in song. In poetry, yes.
Both pronunciations are correct and used in the US.
Sorry, but what you say is neither true of singing, nor of changes to written style that you attribute to Word.
Americans sing in "song English" rather than Standard American because it's a natural concomitant of singing on pitch, elision and sustains. This is true of all English speakers, regardless of dialect, and was true long before there was radio and television, much less the internet. There are, of course, singers who intentionally elect to sing in a dialect.
I have no idea what this sentence means. I'd rather have more options than fewer. As for "readily discernible meaning," I would expect anyone attempting to write, whether it be lyrics, poetry or prose, to have a sufficient command of the language, including a sufficiently large vocabulary, as to encompass all but obscure, arcane or technical words of a language. As for whether those words should be used, that is solely a question of the target audience. If I was writing for children, I'd severely limit the scope of the vocabulary used in lyrics. If I was writing for a poorly-educated demographic, I'd also limit the scope of the vocabulary employed. If I was writing for a reasonably well-educated demographic, I would have fewer, if any, limitations.
Always.
Of course we do. If they weren't, people wouldn't have attended. Shakespeare wrote for his own company and, occasionally, for other companies (and other companies simply staged his plays on their own).
The theater in Shakespeare's time was a populist theater. It, along with bear-baiting and ratting and cock fighting, was, for all intents and purposes, the only entertainment game in town. Shakespeare wrote to please his audience so they would buy tickets and attend his company's performance. That is how he and the players earned their living. It is not coincidence, but rather smart marketing that he called one of his comedies, "As You Like It." Shakespeare wrote for the Elizabethan masses, not for scholars.
I've been told by French people that my accent is quite good, though perhaps they were being polite. However, you miss my point which was this: a rhyming dictionary is not intended as a tool for someone who is not fluent in the language in which it's written. It's a tool for poets and song writers who write in the same language as the dictionary. I have no reason to write lyrics in French, nor would I attempt to do so. I write for the English-speaking stage. If, by some miracle, one of my shows ever succeeds to the point where it will see productions in other countries, the task of translating my lyrics will fall to someone else.
Au contraire, you are the one doing the protesting. You appear to ascribe little value to rhyming dictionaries. However, your objections to them do not appear to be well-taken.
Of course language is fluid -- that's exactly what I said in the post to which you've replied. As for which half of my "nascent journey" (and I think you're using the word "nascent" incorrectly) I find myself, there is a reason why my screen name identifies me as a "Senior" senior member.
), at least in American English. Where did you get the idea that it doesn't?
