One of the most egregious mispronunciation errors in Trek is in TAS: The Pirates of Orion, in which Orion is pronounced OR-ee-on instead of or-RYE-on.
another quibble
- Thread starter Dal Rassak
- Start date
I took that as a bit of the idea "it's exactly like Earth but not quite Earth". Earth would have John and Mary, but this almost-Earth has "Jahn" and "Miri". Exactly like Earth, but not quite.
Perhaps their real names ARE John and Mary, but they are so old that they have forgotten how to spell them? Use of language does tend to drift over time, perhaps this extends to people's names as well.
Was it established that they could spell?
So the name Aaron should be pronounced "Ah ron" not "Air run".
So the name Aaron should be pronounced "Ah ron" not "Air run".
Well Quark insists on saying HEW-mon, so he shouldn't be one to complain!
But more seriously, maybe Odo isn't too good at making mouths, and that's the closest he can get.
I actually like the idea that there are some variances in pronunciation/accent among the different species. It only annoys me if one character pronounces the same name differently each time they say it. I caught one of those recently in DS9, but can't remember what episode.
In "The Corbomite Maneuver," Balok says his own name as "Bay-lock," but Dr. McCoy pronounces it to rhyme with "phallic." Almost as if he'd never heard the name spoken before, but only seen it in print . . . like in a shooting script or something.
Not to mention the United States Constitution!
I thought about the same example when I read OP. And how in Babylon 5 one of guest characters kept calling Ivanova "Ai-vanova". I expected Ivanova to correct her, thinking it was in the script, but she didn't, which means the actress just was pronouncing it wrong and no one even corrected her. Grated on me the whole episode.
In ST, I'm more annoyed by Anglo-Saxon names for 99% of humans
Depends on how you define Anglo-Saxon
I thought about the same example when I read OP. And how in Babylon 5 one of guest characters kept calling Ivanova "Ai-vanova". I expected Ivanova to correct her, thinking it was in the script, but she didn't, which means the actress just was pronouncing it wrong and no one even corrected her. Grated on me the whole episode.
In ST, I'm more annoyed by Anglo-Saxon names for 99% of humans
Kirk-Scottish
McCoy-Scottish
Scott-Scottish
Sulu-Malayo-Polynesian?
Uhura-Swahili
Chekov-Russian
Picard-French
Riker-German
Troi-Gaelic
Crusher-English
LaForge-French
Yar-Unknown
Sisko-various including Nordic and Balkan countries.
O'Brien-Irish
Janeway-English
Paris-French
Torres-Spanish
Chakotay-Faux Indian
Kim-Korean
Hansen-Swedish
Archer-English
Tucker-English
Reed-English
Mayweather-English
Sato-Japanese
Enterprise wins the Anglo-Saxon derby!!!!
Really? I mean, I'm not sure that you're wrong, but I'm Irish and 'Troi' doesn't sound 'Gaelic' to me at all. Although there's a poker player named Tom Dwan and it's only because of him that I know 'Dwan' is an Irish name, so... I dunno. But I'm really not sure you're right on that score.
But beyond that specific point, I think Gul Re'jal was probably referring more to guest star characters than main cast members. It's not something that bothers me in particular, but I think he has a point (as long as we assume he does indeed mean guest stars).
I read it on the internet, so it has to be true.
You're right He might mean guest stars playing humans.
The source linked to actually identifies 'Troy' as a given name to be Gaelic, and as a surname to be Norman French.
I must say that it had occurred to me several times that I would have pronounced some alien names differently, but I've always assumed it was just due to my inadequate knowledge of the English language (English is just a foreign language to me).
I mean, to me as a non-native, English is swamped with inconsistencies I've never quite understood (e.g. take 'good' and 'blood' -- it's written almost the same yet the oo - sounds are nothing alike. I suppose it has to do with the development of the language over the past few centuries and the wish to not change spelling too much -- heck, I actually have less trouble reading English from, say 1630, than reading something from my mother tongue from that era, since the spelling has changed so much ). And blood/good is just a random example, there are so many of them -- several have even been given in this thread. Is there actually any internal logic to it for an average native speaker (i.e. no linguistic scholar), or is it just something you 'are used to because that's the way English is written', like I have become over the years?
Anyway. seen from that background, I've always dismissed the "mm, I think I would have pronounced that as 'ah-min', not 'ay-min' "- thoughts as rather trivial
(*) This reply is not meant to bash your language BTW. Neither is this reply meant to irritate anyone, it's just how things look from my perspective.
I mean, to me as a non-native, English is swamped with inconsistencies I've never quite understood (e.g. take 'good' and 'blood' -- it's written almost the same yet the oo - sounds are nothing alike. I suppose it has to do with the development of the language over the past few centuries and the wish to not change spelling too much -- heck, I actually have less trouble reading English from, say 1630, than reading something from my mother tongue from that era, since the spelling has changed so much ). And blood/good is just a random example, there are so many of them -- several have even been given in this thread. Is there actually any internal logic to it for an average native speaker (i.e. no linguistic scholar), or is it just something you 'are used to because that's the way English is written', like I have become over the years?
Anyway. seen from that background, I've always dismissed the "mm, I think I would have pronounced that as 'ah-min', not 'ay-min' "- thoughts as rather trivial
(*) This reply is not meant to bash your language BTW. Neither is this reply meant to irritate anyone, it's just how things look from my perspective.
Last edited:
No, there isn't.
That's pretty much the case.
Before the introduction of the printing press, there were variant spellings for almost every word in the English language. People wrote words however they thought they sounded. Today's English spelling is so inconsistent because the language became fixed in print before standardized spellings could be agreed upon. Whatever spelling made it into print first became the accepted one.
That's perfectly okay. A lot of us native anglophones find our language plenty irritating as it is.
