I thought this question was confusing, but thanks for explaining. First of all, there is a phenomenon in some varieties of American English called the Mary-marry–merry merger, where all or some of the words Mary, marry, and merry are pronounced the same; that is, the vowels /e/, //, and // are all merged before the sound /r/. In some varieties of American English there is no merger, and all of the words merry are pronounced differently. In some other varieties, two of them are pronounced the same (which two depends on which variety). All the other varieties in the alphabet are merged. In the Indian language, they are all pronounced the same. A discussion of the merger and an associated map in The atlas of North American English, page 58.

As far as I know, the name spelled Sarah and Sara are pronounced the same, regardless of whether Mary, marry, or merry are pronounced differently. Does’s’ matter?

In my own speech, I pronounce all the same (in the way that if I said Mary ), but I can produce the three-way distinction if necessary—usually only to demonstrate this phenomenon.

I thought this question was confusing, but thanks for explaining. First of all, there is a phenomenon in some varieties of American English called the Mary-marry–merry merger, where all or some of the words Mary, marry, and merry are pronounced the same; that is, the vowels /e/, //, and // are all merged before the sound /r/. In some varieties of American English there is no merger, and all of the words merry are pronounced differently. In some other varieties, two of them are pronounced the same (which two depends on which variety). All the other varieties in the alphabet are merged. In the Indian language, they are all pronounced the same. A discussion of the merger and an associated map in The atlas of North American English, page 58.

As far as I know, the name spelled Sarah and Sara are pronounced the same, regardless of whether Mary, marry, or merry are pronounced differently. Does’s’ matter?

In my own speech, I pronounce all the same (in the way that if I said Mary ), but I can produce the three-way distinction if necessary—usually only to demonstrate this phenomenon.

How to rephrase without losing any of the meaning and disregarding the pragmatics of the questioner’s sentiment, I might

say: Of all the times that hearing news of a pregnancy has made me happy, yours ranks second.

Will this formulation cast more light on the awkwardness of the sentiment than the questioner would have wanted.

What is that uncomfortable thing?

How to rephrase without losing any of the meaning and disregarding the pragmatics of the questioner’s sentiment, I might

say: Of all the times that hearing news of a pregnancy has made me happy, yours ranks second.

Will this formulation cast more light on the awkwardness of the sentiment than the questioner would have wanted.

What is that uncomfortable thing?

How to rephrase without losing any of the meaning and disregarding the pragmatics of the questioner’s sentiment, I might

say: Of all the times that hearing news of a pregnancy has made me happy, yours ranks second.

Will this formulation cast more light on the awkwardness of the sentiment than the questioner would have wanted.

What is that uncomfortable thing?

"The other answers here are generally good and correct analyses of the history of these particular phrases." "I just wanted to underline that there is nothing wrong per se with these phrases; they are just not idiomatic in American and British English." "These are not things that native speakers of American and British English would say, so if you say them in the U.S. or Britain, your speech marks you as a foreigner." "If you are trying to master either American English, then part of that mastery would be understanding not to use phrase like \"please do the needful\" and \"please don’t pluck the flowers\" and the word \"prepone\"." "How does the phrase \"please do the needful\" relate to my side of the story?" "Is it too dictatorial and condescending for my taste?"

"The other answers here are generally good and correct analyses of the history of these particular phrases." "I just wanted to underline that there is nothing wrong per se with these phrases; they are just not idiomatic in American and British English." "These are not things that native speakers of American and British English would say, so if you say them in the U.S. or Britain, your speech marks you as a foreigner." "If you are trying to master either American English, then part of that mastery would be understanding not to use phrase like \"please do the needful\" and \"please don’t pluck the flowers\" and the word \"prepone\"." "How does the phrase \"please do the needful\" relate to my side of the story?" "Is it too dictatorial and condescending for my taste?"

The Wikipedia article on intervocalic alveolar flapping addresses this directly:

The cluster can be flapped/tapped; the IPA symbol for a nasal tap is . In quick speech, words like winner and winter can become homophonous. “flip-tapping” does not occur for most speakers in words like carpenter and ninety, which instead surface with “d”.

What is an interactive alveolar flip of clusters?

Can a word be contracted twice?

How did you write the examples you gave in American English? You can’t contract non-auxiliary “hav”! I, too, can’t understand “I’ve not a clue that this is possible” as well as “that has no meaning” is not American English. I know what is being said. But the English language this is mostly in don’t necessarily mean English. The British English language is different.

I found here that “I’ve” is a fine contraction, just in American English you can only use it to

replace “I have” when “have” is used as an auxiliary verb (e.g. Is a conjunction with a past participle. I never said “I’ve been there” is OK, “I have a dog” is not. In the example “I’ven’t a clue”—”I haven’t a clue”, the verb “have” is not auxiliary, so it can’t be contracted with the pronoun “I”

Why?

Can a word be contracted twice?

How did you write the examples you gave in American English? You can’t contract non-auxiliary “hav”! I, too, can’t understand “I’ve not a clue that this is possible” as well as “that has no meaning” is not American English. I know what is being said. But the English language this is mostly in don’t necessarily mean English. The British English language is different.

I found here that “I’ve” is a fine contraction, just in American English you can only use it to

replace “I have” when “have” is used as an auxiliary verb (e.g. Is a conjunction with a past participle. I never said “I’ve been there” is OK, “I have a dog” is not. In the example “I’ven’t a clue”—”I haven’t a clue”, the verb “have” is not auxiliary, so it can’t be contracted with the pronoun “I”

Why?