1

I pronounce "attached to" like "attach to" when the two words are linked and spoken a little fast ([əˈtætʃ.tə]). Is this OK? Or do I have to say [əˈtætʃt.tə]?

Void
  • 18,058
  • 7
  • 75
  • 107
DH K
  • 129
  • 4
  • 3
    Most native speakers pronounce it attach to in colloquial speech. You might also hear it being pronounced with a geminated/long [t]. – Void Mar 14 '21 at 17:17
  • 1
    @Void Could you explain more about the geminated/long [t]? How do you pronounce 't' in a long way? – DH K Mar 14 '21 at 17:21
  • 1
    I really wonder why some comment posters post really technical stuff that a learner could not possibly understand. It is either rude or overbearing or both. – Lambie Mar 14 '21 at 17:26
  • 2
    @DHK: Gemination simply means 'lengthening'. Try saying better late than never** and better late than ever**; whats the difference? The 'n' of 'than never' is a bit longer than that of 'than ever'. You could say the n is geminated/lengthened.... Gemination of stops/plosives (consonants like p, t, k) is different from that of other consonants in that the first stop/plosive is unreleased – Void Mar 14 '21 at 17:44
  • 2
    @Lambie: What technical stuff are you talking about? If you're referring to 'geminated', then I have written /long with it which means that both have more or less the same meaning. I don't think it is rude or overbearing at all. How else could I explain that? Is there a simpler word than LONG? – Void Mar 14 '21 at 17:50
  • 2
    Ok, now you have explained it but why not post an answer? In any event, I am not convinced that in colloquial speech, the [t] is necessarily unrealized in "attached to". It really depends on the speaker and the circumstances. – Lambie Mar 14 '21 at 18:22
  • @Lambie I was busy – Void Mar 14 '21 at 18:35
  • Bro, you should have just posted the full answer first. No hate. I'm a native speaker and I had no idea what gemination was. Anyhow, I've always heard and said attached to as including the t sound at the end of attached, because that's what differentiates it from attach, phonetically. Different words are pronounced differently. This is AmE, SE USA. – FeliniusRex - gone Mar 14 '21 at 21:04

1 Answers1

-1

As you probably know, the -ed in 'attached' is pronounced [t] because the sound preceding the -ed ('ch') is unvoiced, so 'attached' becomes [əˈtʰæt͡ʃt]1. However, when 'to' follows 'attached', we get three consonants in a row: [əˈtʰæt͡ʃt.tʰə] which can be hard-to-pronounce. The simple way to get round it is to drop the -ed ([t]):

  • [əˈtʰæt͡ʃt.tʰə] → [əˈtʰæt͡ʃ.tʰə]

In colloquial speech, most native speakers will simply drop the -ed (/t/) and will pronounce it the same as attach to. However, you will also hear the -ed being pronounced as an unreleased2 't'. Context will make it clear which form is used, so you shouldn't be worried about it.

NOTES:

  1. The superscript h [ʰ] represents aspiration. Aspiration is the puff of air that accompanies consonants such as p, t, k when they occur at the beginning of a stressed syllable.
  2. 'Unreleased' in this context simply means that the consonant (p, t, k usually) has no release burst
Void
  • 18,058
  • 7
  • 75
  • 107
  • Re the ch, you said: "because the preceding sound ('ch') is unvoiced" The preceding sound in walk is voiced, and the ed past morpheme, the ed is pronounced [t] , also. So..... – Lambie Mar 14 '21 at 19:55
  • I did not downvote anything. However, I disagree with this: "the -ed in 'attached' is pronounced [t] because the sound preceding the -ed ('ch') is unvoiced," And I am SAYING, that the sound [k] preceding the ed in walk [k], is voiced. So, both cannot be true. – Lambie Mar 14 '21 at 20:10
  • @Lambie: Is [k] really voiced?! – Void Mar 14 '21 at 20:15
  • No, I guess it is voiceless unlike tag. – Lambie Mar 14 '21 at 20:27