Page 30 - The Gluckman Occasional Number Ten

3. The Second Month

A report prepared for Zeitschrift der Sprachnarishkeit

The natural speech of 239,782 random Americans was recorded and
processed by the A.I. Linguisticator at the University of Krampus. It
found several statistically significant patterns in the pronunciation of
“February”, none confirming the generally held hypothesis of
dissimilation. This supports the evidence previously gathered by the
teams from Heidelberg and Neanderthal concerning “nuclear”. See
the appendix for other failed Francophonetic assimilation. The meta-
analysis of these rigorous research projects is presented in Figure 1.

While several peer-reviewed studies have supported the theory of
dissimilation with regard to this phenomenon (example: “dint” for
“didn’t”), the present authors prefer an interdisciplinary approach,
with the anatomical and physiologic aspects of speech science given
their proper weight. The UST (Universal Slur Tendency) gives a good
approximation of predicted mispronunciation. Indeed, were the
general public polled on how they would rather name the second
month of the year, it would probably be “Febuary” or “Fevery”. That
would produce the social leveling effect most Americans seek.