How do you pronounce often?

[Gemini Alpha Female]

[Me Ann]

Hi Chiquitita,

Thanks for the attention. Yes, I also seen the two pronunciations you stated. That's
why I didn't say pronouncing often with "t" on it is not correct...I said in my post that
I "heard" how it was pronounced and I just shared my own view about it. Adding to that, I was taught by my language teacher that the correct pronunciation of that word is /ofen/. Since then....that is how I pronounce the word. Just like Mr. Torsten, I am also surprised to know that native English speakers do pronounce the word with "t".
I have nothing to go against it though.

[Me Ann]

Hi Oxfordblues,

Thank you for sharing your views. Well, I am not a native English speaker and so
here in my country we definitely follow language rules especially in English. I could say learning English is not quite easy. When I was still very young learning English, I was corrected by my language teacher when I pronounced often with 't'. She emphasized that it should be pronounced with silent 't'.
Anyway, it's an additional knowledge to know now that 'often' could be pronounced either way.

[Borislav]

Please activate Javascript in your browser to listen to this audio recording

26 Listened

Download mp3	Click to listen

Hi Torsten,
Both words "often" and "soften" in the dictionary's transcription are without "T" and definitely I taught them to be pronounced without "T".

[OxfordBlues]

The t in soften is usually not pronounced, although it is pronounced in most other forms with soft in them.

Soft, softer, softest, and softness all have the 't'.

soften, softener, and softening do not.
_________________
There's no such thing as an exception to the rule...

My blog: http://calleteach.wordpress.com

[Political Lurker]

Please activate Javascript in your browser to listen to this audio recording

16 Listened

Download mp3	Click to listen

You could say you like "an apple"
you shouldn't say.. you like "an banana"

We say "an apple" simply because it is easier to say as the word order makes a apple sound like one word.

I personally don't think it makes any difference if the T is stressed or not provided it sounds natural. But the structure of the sentence and the position of the word.

"Do you come here often" and "More often than not" would have the T stressed

But - "You don't offen see that" and "more offen than not"

I would guess if it sounds right - it is right

or
_________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

[OxfordBlues]

Well it may sound right to you, but at the same time may sound incorrect to a few hundred other million people.

It seems to me that it's best when in an ESL environment to teach the most common pronunciation and especially the pronunciation that is most within the rules of English phonology.
_________________
There's no such thing as an exception to the rule...

My blog: http://calleteach.wordpress.com

[Political Lurker]

[OxfordBlues]

There is no rule about stressing a t i often just as there is no rule about "silent t's" as have been mentioned on this thread. The t is to be pronounced, that is the rule of English and anything else is an oddity and not standard. This isn't about US vs UK English.
_________________
There's no such thing as an exception to the rule...

My blog: http://calleteach.wordpress.com

[Political Lurker]

[OxfordBlues]

Phonology of a language consists of rules for how sounds combine to express meaning. Within those rules there is governance regarding the sounds that certain letters or combinations represent in given circumstances.

There is no rule within this body that is English phonology that says a 't' is stressed at some times and not stressed at others. Likewise there is no such rule for a "silent t". Those rules do not exist within "the rules".

Really if you're going to argue this sort of thing it's probably best that you read a few books on English phonology. It's a well-studied field.

As for Oxford English being a standard, there is little argument for this when such a small percentage of native speakers speak Oxford English. And then on top of that, there is the matter of defining Oxford English. Is it the English of the common local inhabitants of Oxford or Oxfordshire? Is it the English that is expected to be spoken by the University of Oxford faculty? Or is it the English listed in the OED?

Also, I've yet to meet either a graduate or professor at Oxford who says "offen".
_________________
There's no such thing as an exception to the rule...

My blog: http://calleteach.wordpress.com

[Political Lurker]

Phonology has nothing to do with what we're talking about which is why you are unable specify a connection.

I looked back through the thread and you stated openly it was against the rules of English - except when asked - you cant show it.???

Oxford English is the source of English - full stop - Period.

Internationally - US English is a "version" of English and will always be a sub section of it - for chronological reasons not numerical ones.
It is like a river which is flowing and changing - for that reason alone in an International context we need to go to the source.

You are talking from you're own US context.
I am talking from a British and Irish context and also from the International context of this site. If you are out numbered why not just accept it or else produce a directive or something physical to back up your assertions instead of what you have been doing here so far.
_________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

[OxfordBlues]

If you would study the language more you would easily learn that the US varieties of English tend to be the older varieties, so if chronology is important, start using the English of North America for everything. Also if you really want to get into the whole international English debate, 3/4 of all English speakers speak the American varieties. Even if you look at just population 60 million speakers in the UK (and 3 million in Ireland) versus 330 million in the US and 33 million in Canada.

These things aren't important! I write, edit, and review ESL courses, textbooks, and dictionaries whether they draw on American or British or Australian or even South African English. Guess what? The differences are slight, and the grammar is pretty much identical among all of them.

In teaching English you have to separate opinion. You don't teach Yorkshire English, you don't teach California, or Brisbane, or Singapore English. You teach English. Students don't need to be subjected to the rantings of people trying to support one regionalism over another. There are standard rules of grammar, usage, and pronunciation that may not be the norm for every speaker in every region, but they are the standard. That is what you teach in ESL. Call it prescriptivism if you like, but that is the job of an ESL instructor. If a student wants to learn a regional attribute of the language, that is up to them, but communication and mutual intelligibility is the goal of ESL and that is what the guidance provided in this forum should be based on.

Your user ID says Ambivalent Lurker, yet your posts are not ambivalent, and are normally purposefully derisive and argumentative and have no positive effect whatsoever for the people who use this site to improve their English. Just as with your debate last night, I'm not going to argue over something with you with which you are either poorly informed or simply choose not to explore with the goal of understanding. If you want to detract from language learning on this site, it's your own problem, but I will no longer participate in your odd game.
_________________
There's no such thing as an exception to the rule...

My blog: http://calleteach.wordpress.com

[Political Lurker]