The End of the “Nu-cu-lar” Age?
Alex Alexiades
On January 20, 2009, we will usher in a new president of the United States, hopefully marking the end of the “nu-cu-lar” era.
No, I’m not referring to nuclear proliferation or nuclear energy. I’m simply talking about the pronunciation of the word “nuclear.”
For eight long years, we had to endure the mispronunciation of the word nuclear. I remember several years ago being shocked when I heard President George W. Bush say the word, which he pronounced “new-cyoo-ler.”
And unfortunately, over time, his pronunciation of this word has become readily accepted by people from all walks of life.
Many people anxiously await the changes a new executive administration will bring. Along with these changes, I eagerly await the end of the “nu-cu-lar” age, with hopes that President-elect Barack Obama will bring back the correct pronunciation of this word.
A few months ago, while listening to a panel of speakers discuss the clean energy potential of Nevada, one of the speakers said “nu-cu-lar,” causing me to wince uncomfortably.
I leaned over to some of my friends to laugh about it. However, I was dismayed to find that not only had they missed the mistake, they had come to believe over the last eight years that “nu-cu-lar” was the correct pronunciation.
I started to doubt my sanity, or at least my proficiency in the English language. I immediately began investigating the “proper” pronunciation of this word and found that nuclear is (at least as of eight years ago) pronounced as it’s spelled, “new-clee-ar.”
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary states that the pronunciation “nu-cu-lar” has “been found in widespread use … ” However, they temper this by acknowledging the existence of the error.
Many would argue that language is a dynamic, constantly evolving entity. Regional dialects, idiomatic expressions and slang make the vernacular form of English both familiar and colorful.
It would sound very strange indeed, if, for example, an American from Tennessee started speaking the “Queen’s English.”
Bush’s incorrect pronunciation of nuclear is an example of a metathesis, which is the switching of two adjacent sounds. The problem is that this metathesis was uncommon, or at least less pervasive than it was before Bush took office.
The people, not a single public figure, should be changing the vernacular.
For example, in the southeastern United States, many people say “diddy” rather than daddy.
In New England, some people say “wuh-ter” rather than water.
If these regional changes were to become part of “American” English, that would be acceptable. But Bush almost single-handedly changing the pronunciation of “nuclear” would be quite another.
You might be reading this thinking, “Hey, I say nu-cu-lar too!”
In fact, for many college age students, the most formative years of their lives might have been during the “Nu-cu-lar Age.”
If you find yourself speaking like G. W., don’t fret. It is never too late to make a change and try to bring back the proper pronunciation of this word. Whatever legacy the Bush administration may leave, let’s not allow this to be part of it.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, November 25th, 2008 at 12:12 am and is filed under Perspectives.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Print this post
Email this post© 2008 The Nevada Sagebrush
November 26th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
get a life kid
November 27th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
…says a ~55-year-old guy. :)) Gotta love the irony.