Talk:Initial-stress-derived noun

message: Unless there are any objections, I'm going to add the content of this page to List of English homographs and make this page a redirect (which quite possibly ought to be deleted). --Nohat 03:42, 2004 Jan 9 (UTC)
What's this? Shouldn't be moved to Wikibooks or Wikitionary? What's about List of English words can be used both as nouns and verbs? :O --快艇 (Talk)☺ 04:15, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
I don't think that pages that are little more than lists of words are all that helpful, however they are titled. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary.) However, the idea of words changing from one part of speech to another when the stress is moved is an interesting one, and may well merit an article. Is this a recognised phenomenon in linguistics? Does it have a name? In what other languages does it occur? If anyone can think of an appropriate name, perhaps the page could be moved there. The article could well still include the list of words, as I don't think there is an overwhelming number of them.
As for pronunciations being different for different speakers, explaining the differences in usage in the article would be more useful than just removing the affected words altogether. I've retrieved the words removed from the page and listed them below. I can't see what was wrong with a large proportion of them. The "ak-SENT" form, to take the first example, is perfectly normal in British English, so it shoudn't be removed just because the same is not true in other forms of English.
The phrases "crack down", "drop out", "fall out", "hand out" were also removed. These aren't words, so obviously don't really fit into the category being discussed. However, they do display a similar behaviour, since moving the stress to the first syllable (in writing, merging them into a single word with or without a hyphen) turns them into nouns. This could perhaps be discussed somewhere in the article. -- Oliver P. 07:12, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to do with the content 

message: Folks here are pretty knowledgeable about this.  As a comment from a regular user, this topic is fascinating. I have a 5th grader who I have had an ongoing discussion about the importance of good pronunciation.  I came across this article after browsing the delete list.  From the perspective of someone who enjoys learning new things about the english language, this is a gem.  It strikes me it is also a big issue to the folks interested in computer translation of documents.  I'd encourage a title that would make the article findable if someone was interested in the topic of pronunciation Kd4ttc 18:47, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  This topic is fascinating 

message: Regarding perfume, this came up on a Sherlock search:
perfume
\Per*fume"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Perfumed; p. pr. & vb. n. Perfuming.] [F. parfumer (cf. Sp. perfumar); par (see Par) + fumer to smoke, L. fumare, fr. fumus smoke. See Fume.] To fill or impregnate with a perfume; to scent.
And Carmel's flowery top perfumes the skies. --Pope.
perfume
\Per"fume\, n. [F. parfum; cf. Sp. perfume. See Perfume, v.] 1. The scent, odor, or odoriferous particles emitted from a sweet-smelling substance; a pleasant odor; fragrance; aroma.
No rich perfumes refresh the fruitful field. --Pope.
2. A substance that emits an agreeable odor.
Note that the verb is accented on the second syllable, the noun on the first.
Steve Kd4ttc 02:18, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, if I am scanning those right as iambic pentameter, Pope is stressing both like we'd now stress the verb! Phlogistomania 15:24, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Reinserted perfume into list.  American Heritage College Dictionalry shows that as a transitive verb it is always accented on the second syllable, while as a noun it may be pronounced with the accent on either the first or second syllable. Kd4ttc 19:04, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: While I've not been to England, I can attest that the distinction is common with American English speakers.  -Aeonoris (talk) 17:38, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Perfume'' 

message: This talk page became duplicated as a result of a copy-and-paste page move. I have merged the histories of both pages together, and have (I hope) restored all the comments in a way that makes sense, but you might like to check for yourselves... -- Oliver P. 09:03, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  History merge 

message: There are other languages that also use the same process (I believe Hebrew does, but I don't speak it...).  Should this page be more general with English as a sub-heading? -mahern
:This process is normally associated with languages with a low amount of inflexion (contrast Classical Greek, in which the noun "perfume" is μυρον, whilst to say "I perfume [DIRECT OBJECT]" one would write προμυριζω προ [GENITIVE] - the stem μυρ- is there in both words, but there are an awful lot of other things going on) and with a relatively low amount of consistency on which syllable carries the stress (contrast modern Italian, where the stress is almost always on the penultimate, except when marked with a grave on the ultimate (e.g. città) or an acute on the antepenultimate (e.g. Nápoli)). English is probably the strongest example of displaying both these characteristics. Phlogistomania 15:59, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
:: I'd like to correct you in some details about modern Italian, being an Italian native speaker. The stress is not "almost always" on the penultimate, even if that's the most common case; also, the graphical stress is only compulsory if on the last syllable. So, whether the accent is on the penultimate or the antepenultimate is unpredictable, and even many native speakers tend to get some cases wrong. Napoli is the correct spelling, and Nàpoli would only ever be used by a dictionary to mark the stress - it's allowed but unexpected in real writing. Nápoli is today considered incorrect; 'a', 'i', 'u' can only take a grave accent, while on 'e' and 'o' the used accent must be the grave for open vowels (IPA /ɛ/, /ɔ/), and the acute for closed vowels (IPA /e/, /o/). I've found mention of the rule you describe in the Italian wikipedia (), as used until some decades ago (until the reform of 1967).
:: Finally, utensile can be both a noun and an adjective, and can have different stress in the two cases; the adjective must be pronounced utènsile, the noun is utensìle, or less frequently utènsile. I don't think there are many other cases, if any. --Blaisorblade (talk) 18:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other languages? 

message: There are two examples (envelop/envelope, unit/unite) where the spelling is different in the name and in the verb. In both cases, after learning about the silent e feature of English spelling, one could say that the stress change prompted for a different (i.e. tense) pronunciation of the vowel in the last syllable (the 'o' in envelope, the 'i' in unite), which was reflected in spelling by the addition of a silent 'e'. I can't add it to the article since that is absolutely original research and I'm not a linguist, but is there some reputable source claiming this? --Blaisorblade (talk) 18:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect you're more likely to get a good answer to that question at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language or in specialized internet forums, than here. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationale for spelling differences in some pairs 

message: A list of exceptions (for example "comment" stressed on the first syllable either as a noun or as a verb) may be useful here.--S.Camus (talk) 11:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exceptions 

message: See Bombard (weapon).  Should bombard be on this list? Michael Hardy (talk) 05:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Bombard'' 

message: In my experience of this word, it's pronounced so that its last syllable rhymes with "eight" when it's a verb, but the vowel in the last syllable is maximally reduced when it's a noun or an adjective.  But I've never heard it pronounced with the accent on a later syllable than the first, so it would appear not to belong on this list.  I deleted it. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:45, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "alternate"? 

message: A category relating to initial stress–derivation can be created under wikt:Category:English terms by etymology, and a template to be placed in the Etymology sections of articles. Not sure precisely how this should be done, but I think this etymology-related category would be the most appropriate place for it. — Eru·tuon 04:57, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiktionary 

message: those words which shift stress, depending on verb/noun, should go under the 'suprafix' heading.  the list, however, isn't clear, since it contains words with stress on initial vowel, and other words with stress on final syllable; not all are initial-stress syllable words. 
("access" is another word for the list provided,) Stjohn1970 (talk) 22:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  verb / noun difference  (suprafix) 

message: It reads: "When RE is prefixed to a monosyllabic word, and the word gains currency both as a noun and as a verb, it usually fits into this (??) pattern. although, as the following list makes clear, [however], most words fitting this pattern do not match that (??) description."   Who claims that? Also, make it clear what 'this' and 'that' refer to. 
In any case, with the RE prefix the phenomenon seems to be the norm for nouns to be stressed on the initial syllable. Stjohn1970 (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  consider rewording... 

message: Exceptions should be mentioned, such as excuse (verb ɪkˈskjuːz vs noun ɪkˈskjuːs) JMGN (talk) 10:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exceptions