You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

polymathwannabe comments on Open thread, July 28 - August 3, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: polymathwannabe 28 July 2014 08:27PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (241)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 04 August 2014 12:05:30PM 1 point [-]

Merriam-Webster gives \ˈbird\, Cambridge gives /bɪərd/, and Wiktionary gives /bɪɹd/. Unfortunately Oxford requires a subscription, but all of the others seem to agree.

Comment author: ChristianKl 04 August 2014 01:03:28PM 1 point [-]

Okay, I was going with Google define with gives /bɪəd/. It seems like the pronunciation various significantly between different English dialects.

If you listen to the Merriam-Webster audio file then there an /r/ sound. But if you listen to the audio file on Google define there's only the schwa.

Unfortunately Oxford requires a subscription, but all of the others seem to agree.

Given that all three give different definition of how the word is supposed to be pronounced, "agree"is a bit strong. Even if we only look at the "r" Wiktionary suggests an alveolar approximant for US English suggests that optional in UK English. On the other hand while the British dictionary Merriam-Webster suggest an alveolar trill and Cambridge suggest also a alveolar trill for US English.

That means whether not there is a consonant behind the "r" in beard and what consonant that might be depends on the dialect that you speak.