<div dir="ltr"><div>Thanks!</div><div><br></div><div>I was not expecting the discussion about the pronunciation of the vowel "o", may fault XD. This can be a never ending topic among native English speakers (to many similar sounds for me).<br></div><div>My question was more oriented to the final "j". So far we agree on that. The rhyme with "dodge" is useful.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Javier.<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 at 14:18, Paul Harwood <<a href="mailto:runette@gmail.com">runette@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Since you have started ...<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am London English and I say it (like you based on that fact it is short for projection) with the same vowel as US "process" and not the vowel from UK "process" ... No one ever said that the English were consistent ... :).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But to be honest, the o sounds in English English ( as opposed to Scottish or Welsh or RP) are highly class dependant.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">No one is ever going to agree about the bowl sounds. The consistent part is that it ends with a hard(-ish) "j"</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 27 Mar 2023, 13:05 Greg Troxel, <<a href="mailto:gdt@lexort.com" target="_blank">gdt@lexort.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Javier Jimenez Shaw <<a href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">j1@jimenezshaw.com</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
> Recently somebody asked me why do I pronounce PROJ that way.<br>
> What I try to say is /ˈprɒdʒ/ ( hear it somehow<br>
> <a href="http://ipa-reader.xyz/?text=%CB%88pr%C9%92d%CA%92" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ipa-reader.xyz/?text=%CB%88pr%C9%92d%CA%92</a> )<br>
> Is there any "official" way or consensus about it?<br>
<br>
My opinions have formed in a vacuum separated from actually talking to<br>
others, but:<br>
<br>
I see PROJ as sort for "projection".<br>
<br>
I pronounce it as rhyming with "dodge". This has a different vowel<br>
and different voicing of the j sound than when I say the word<br>
projection.<br>
<br>
I view my pronunciation as the way I expect other native en_US<br>
speakers to read it (knowing/guessing "proj is short for projection")<br>
without any prior experience. en_CA and maybe en_GB I would maybe<br>
expect a long O, but I am pretty sure Gerald Evenden was from the US.<br>
<br>
Relative to the <a href="http://ipa-reader.xyz" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">ipa-reader.xyz</a> "sally - american", I say it faster, with<br>
the vowel being maybe 2/3 the length and the j even less. But it's<br>
quite close, and I'm from ~Boston so I talk wicked fast compared to<br>
people from e.g. Georgia.<br>
<br>
You can hear a shift to a slightly longer O in "brian - british". A<br>
Canadian might have a much larger shift to fully long O, the way they<br>
would says "process", but I think the short word somewhat avoids that.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PROJ mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">PROJ@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>