Illogical pronunciation spreading . . .

Analyzing and documenting our processeez
©Information Disciplines, Inc., Chicago
Conrad Weisert, 7 January 2010

This article may be reproduced and distributed freely, as long as the copyright credit is included.

More and more business systems analysis professionals and speakers are taking up the strange habit of pronouncing the plural of process as "processeez". Strictly speaking, that's not wrong, but it's jarring and distracting when a lecturer repeats it a hundred times during a presentation:

Here's what Answers.com says:

USAGE NOTE In recent years there has been a tendency to pronounce the plural ending -es of processes as (-eez), perhaps by analogy with words of Greek origin such as analysis and neurosis. But process is not of Greek origin, and there is no etymological justification for this pronunciation of its plural. However, because this pronunciation is not uncommon even in educated speech, it is generally considered an acceptable variant, although it still strikes some listeners as a bungled affectation. In a recent survey 79 percent of the Usage Panel preferred the standard pronunciation (-iz) for the plural ending -es and 15 percent preferred the pronunciation (-eez).

Should we consider processeez a "bungled affectation" when we hear it in our businesseez?


Return to Business & culture articles
IDI home page

Last modified 8 January 2010