To find this wrong in a young child's book - particularly in a Bookstart book?

[PrettyCandles]

'bath' rhymed with 'laugh'.

[fingernails on blackboard icon]

I really don't think people will alter their diction because they have read a wonky rhyme in a baby's book.

I still say that "barth" and "laugh" sounds ok. All you have to do is say it properly and then there's no problem surely. Does it really matter if it doesn't rhyme in the strictest sense of the word???

They do rhyme. Assonance etc.

I am east Scotland and have no issues with it.
Baath. Laaugh.

No, but a really good, funny, well-written rhyming book is more enjoyable and easier to read and just better. I don't like seeing badly written books foisted on schoolchildren, when there are so many great books out there.

A board flap book is hardly aimed at 'school children'. Babies don't bloody care. They like sitting on your lap, grabbing flaps, chewing the corners, looking at the bright colours in the pictures and hearing your voice. None of which is remotely compromised by a slightly inaccurate rhyme.

I do agree Snowl. There is an awful Wobble bear book that stutters instead of skipping along. Dd loves it. But she loves The Cat in the Hat more.

Agree Aloha.
We are talking about a baby book. For youngsters not old enough yet for "Peepo", "Slinky Malinky" and so on. That takes about 30 seconds to read. That would, in my opinion, in no way hold back or disadvantage the child "reading" it.

They don't rhyme! If two words rhyme, they end with the same sound. "th" and "f" are not the same sound! In some accents, differing pronunciation will mean you do get a rhyme here, but not generally.

A really good rhymer knows that books will be read by people with different accents and even published abroad and allows for that. For example, it's not a good idea to rhyme "more" with "paw" because although they rhyme in RP English, they will sound very different in accents that pronounce the "r', such as US English, Scottish English and Irish English.

And we have it from the Professional! Thanks snowleopard for stating in crystal clear proper language what I was trying to say all along.

I still think it's a load of silly arrrsonnance to worry about it too much though.

Whoever said that all poetry has to have 100% full rhymes all the time anyway? Or that all poetry for children does? Tell that to the very famous and wonderful. Ogden Nash. See here:
www.westegg.com/nash/santa.html

Nash rhymes 'because' with Santa Claus, and 'doesn't' with 'wasn't'.

Bath doesn't rhyme FULLY with laugh but that does not invalidate it as literature!!

It doesn't rhyme, but it doesn't matter.

""big flaps for little babies to turn".

It's hardly ORT...

pmsl @ literature

Snowleopard, you're a publisher but you're not a writer.

Jackstini, if you're still around that bottle bugs me too! Don't care about the bath/laugh bit though. Mind you at 17 months DD2 isn't using this book as her sole grammar textso there's hope for her yet!

there are still people with an opinion on this? Will it never end?

OK, I wasn't taking into account how young this book was, but it has been given to PC's DS to read. And as she pointed out, this particular crappy "rhyme" is confusing for her DS.

And I don't agree anyway. Even babies should get to read better-quality writing if there's a choice. No they're not going to sit there assessing its literary qualities, but better rhythm, better rhyming and well-constructed verse make it more fun and satisfying for both adult reader and child listener. It's like music - it sinks in. I work in children's publishing and I strongly feel it's not OK to allow lower quality just because it's for kids - quite the opposite in fact. It's their first exposure to things like books and language and rhyming, so if it's crap that's the standard they'll come to expect, and they may not learn to get the joy out of it that they could.

I know I'm soapboxing but... grrr at the awful crappy books that children are expected to read as part of schemes, that will just basically put them off books.

I've got one where "beard" rhymes with "heard"

WHAT?

Fluffy, yes I am a writer, I was just keeping it a bit vague for reasons of anonymity. I've worked at a publishing company and now do writing, consultancy and editing for children's books, including non-fiction, fiction and rhyming stories.

oh dear, now you are going to get 100 CATS from people saying "My husband has written this graet children's book about a magic pony and -"

Re half-rhymes and other rhymes that aren't true rhymes but work anyway, fluffy you're right. Ogden nash is a master at that and often his not-quite rhymes work because they're funny in themselves. That's a whole nother discussion. But there's a difference between a funny, deliberate Nash-esque not-quite rhyme, and one that's just a cop-out and there because the author couldn't do any better.

But different kinds of rhyme do not make it lower quality. It really really doesn't! Snowleopard, did you read the Ogden Nash link?

MP

That was another reason

No, half-rhymes don't make something crap. Crap rhymes make it crap. If you know something about it Fluffy, you'll know the difference when you're reading.

Is it possible to say what is definitively a crap rhyme or isn't it just a matter of opinion? OK, so plenty of people think that bath and laugh is a crap rhyme, but that doesn't mean it IS, or that it shouldn't be published. I don't like the poetry of Keats, but that doesn't make it crap.

i think it would only really matter if it were a limerick