Hi All Alandra's note points out the problems of trying to demonstrate pronunciation without access to (even with knowledge of) the phonetic alphabet. For example the spelling moosh may be taken as rhyming with push, but might equally be a rhyme with ruche. The only safe thing is to demonstrate by means of a rhyme with a word that only has one pronunciation in English and American. For the English(?) slang term 'mush', a good rhyme is bush. People have commented on the possible origins of this word, and Alan McGowan has given us a Romany origin. Opinions on the extent of use of the word have settled generally on the Southern Counties of England, but with some usage further north. So I consulted all the dictionaries I have. My etymological dictionary doesn't have it, neither does the huge Shorter Oxford Dictionary . Finally I looked at Chapman's 'American Slang' which someone gave me years ago, and was amazed to find it listed! Mush or moosh: n fr middle 1800s. The face, esp the mouth and jaws. He pulled his mush away from the plate and sighed - Jeremy Weldman (origin unknown) No mention of the 'mate' connotation though. Cheers, Dave Jacobs =============== At 00:58 18/09/2004, clargo wrote: >Hello everybody, > >Mush was used by us Westend lads in 1950's but one correction is that >"isn't" was not used in that area. >It was "aint it" or "init" > >"Gernight" from Rod in Andover. > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Dave wrote, "Alandra's note points out the problems of trying to demonstrate pronunciation without access to (even with knowledge of) the phonetic alphabet." Hi Dave, At first I couldn't see how this had anything to do with knowledge of, or ignorance of, the phonetic alphabet. In fact I thought the word you were looking for was phonemics. <grin> I had always thought that the phonetic alphabet was to enable clarity of, for example, acronyms in speech. It has changed several times over the years and over the organisation using it, but possibly the most common version now starts Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta etc. However I see that there is a significant difference between 'phonetic alphabet' and 'phonetic spelling' which is new to me - so learn something new every day, eh?? :-) Regards Brian Incoming mail is certified Virus Free Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) Version 6.0.766 Virus Database 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004

Hi Brian You are right of course, that the term 'phonetic alphabet' commonly refers to the Alpha Bravo stuff. However, my Shorter Oxford Dictionary (1962), in the Introduction, has a section 3: 'The pronunciation is noted within round brackets by means of a phonetic alphabet, ...' Unfortunately I do not seem to have a code page on my PC that has this alphabet. Thanks for the correction though. Cheers, Dave Jacobs ============== At 09:07 19/09/2004, Brian wrote: >Dave wrote, "Alandra's note points out the problems of trying to demonstrate >pronunciation without access to (even with knowledge of) the phonetic >alphabet." > >Hi Dave, > >At first I couldn't see how this had anything to do with knowledge of, or >ignorance of, the phonetic alphabet. In fact I thought the word you were >looking for was phonemics. <grin> > >I had always thought that the phonetic alphabet was to enable clarity of, >for example, acronyms in speech. It has changed several times over the years >and over the organisation using it, but possibly the most common version now >starts Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta etc. > >However I see that there is a significant difference between 'phonetic >alphabet' and 'phonetic spelling' which is new to me - so learn something >new every day, eh?? :-) > >Regards >Brian > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) >Version 6.0.766 Virus Database 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004