>but if you write it dam-ned there would be no >need for the stress accent, which will only >confuse most english-speaking singers, especially >if they know a little bit of french and would >expect an accent aigu instead of grave at this >point in the word. otherwise, to indicate grave >instead of aigu pronunciation, you would be best >to add a silent -e following the final consonant. >however, separating the -mn construction could >lead to confusion - as mark d. has so >convincingly pointed out (thanks for the repost, >c.s.).
It's hard for me to imagine pronouncing "damned" as two syllables, but if ever I did encounter it, I think I'd be sorely tempted to hyphenate it "dam-ned". That's an exception for me, since as a general rule I wouldn't remove a consonant from the end of a verb in order to group it with the -ed suffix. But I also can't think of any other verb where the final consonant is silent when the verb stands alone, but is pronounced when the -ed suffix is added. To spell it "damn-ed" would invite a silent n, which I assume is not what you want. By the way, I don't see what's wrong with the grave accent. I see that all the time in verse (eg, Shakespeare) to indicate a vowel which might otherwise be silent gets its own syllable. mdl _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
