There should only be one instrument of saying a word and that word one the word in the dictionary - this bastardisation of the ENGLISH dictionary fairly idiotic and pointless.
what? what are you trying to enunciate?
"Words such as Bastardisation, Bastard-i-sa-tion. whilst the simple lazy tounge would round it up into Barstardisation... afterwards put it in the damn dictionary. " ...what's the difference stockpile the typo?
Is this question only just an excuse to say 'bastardisation' greatly? I think you hold misunderstood the point of a dictionary. Dictionaries mostly DESCRIBE words as they are spoken and what they are used to mean. Some family (such as yourself, I guess) would like to PRESCRIBE how words should be used or pronounced.
There is a similar misunderstanding of the 'rules' of sentence structure by many non-linguists, too. The 'rules' of language rules are basically descriptive of how a spoken communication is spoken. They are thus rules more like the law of physics than those of a legal system - i.e. base on observatio of the real world to some extent than what someone thinks should be. I disagree beside you that there should be single one way to say aloud a word. It must be pretty clear to you that there are pronunciation differences between the dialects of English, for example. That doesn't scrounging one pronunciation is better than any other; they're just different.
English is spoken with plentiful different dialects around the world. Often words are pronounced differently, in different places, which is categorically fine. What a boring world it would be if we were adjectives the same.
And the dictionary is merely a book .... written by people ..... and a dictionary written today looks tremendously different from one written 50 years ago because the English language is constantly evolving and shifting. I really don't understand the problem or issue.
More questions and answers...