"Laziness" and English usage
Raymond S. Wise
occasionally made that a particular usage is "due to laziness." In
every case that I can remember, the usage in question was correct for
the dialect of the person speaking it, and to ascribe it to laziness
was an absurdity. I recently came across a discussion of the question
of "laziness" in a discussion of African American Vernacular English
(also known as "AAVE," "Black English," or "Ebonics"), and thought it
would be worthwhile to post it here:
From
http://www.stanford.edu/~rickford/papers/SuiteForEbonyAndPhonics.html
[quote]
One reason people might regard Ebonics as "lazy English" is its
tendency to omit word-final consonants, especially if they come after
another consonant, as in "tes(t)" and "han(d)." But if one were just
being lazy or cussed or both, why not also leave out the final
consonant in a word like "pant"? This is NOT permitted in Ebonics, and
the reason (building on your newly acquired knowledge about voicing)
is that Ebonics does not allow the deletion of the second consonant in
a word-final sequence unless both consonants are either voiceless, as
with "st," or voiced, as with "nd." In the case of "pant," the final
"t" is voiceless, but the preceding "n" is voiced. Not only is Ebonics
systematic in following this rule, but even its exceptions to the
rule--negative forms like "ain'," and "don'"--are non-random. In
short, Ebonics is no more lazy English than Italian is lazy Latin. To
see the (expected) regularity in both we need to see each in its own
terms, appreciating the complex rules that native speakers follow
effortlessly and unconsciously in their daily lives.
[end quote]
The quote "In short, Ebonics is no more lazy English than Italian is
lazy Latin." is particularly apt, and it reminded me of the situation
in French between the prestige dialect, Parisian French, and the
dialect spoken in the South of France. In Parisian French, many of the
e's which were pronounced in the past no longer are, but there are
dialects in which they continue to be pronounced. I am personally
acquainted with one person who speaks that way. Although not French,
he lived in the South of France as a boy and learned to speak French
with the accent of the people of that region. It obviously silly to
say that the Parisian French speakers are being "lazy." Of course they
are not, they are simply pronouncing the language as they were taught
to pronounce it.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
meirm...@erols.com
(Raymond S. Wise) posted:
>In alt.usage.english and alt.english.usage , the comment is
>occasionally made that a particular usage is "due to laziness." In
>every case that I can remember, the usage in question was correct for
>the dialect of the person speaking it, and to ascribe it to laziness
>was an absurdity.
It never would have occurred to me that an individual or a set of them
was being accused of laziness when he dropped a final letter, a middle
letter, or elided two letter etc.
>I recently came across a discussion of the question
>of "laziness" in a discussion of African American Vernacular English
>(also known as "AAVE," "Black English," or "Ebonics"), and thought it
>would be worthwhile to post it here:
My mind is blank now but there are loads of English words where the
standard English pronuncation and spelling and before that the Latin
pronunciation and spelling when adding a Latin suffix involved
??elision?? except there is another term used. One is Permit and
Permission, but there are a lot better examples. It never occurred
to me to call one Roman lazy for pronouncing things this way.
But as a whole I think these are all lazy changes, perpetrated by
society as a whole, over time. Is the word only used so differently
from this.
Of course Blacks are sensitive to a charge of laziness, if it is
directed only at their usages, but I can't imagine why it would be.
One more remark at the end.
Why just look at non-pronounced e's? What about all the
non-pronounced consonants at the ends of French words? That's
universal. And not this generation, except for new changes in the
works, but at one time they were lazy too. Everyone is lazy,
especially children, and they are "our future".
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 17 years
Jacqui
> Raymond S. Wise posted:
>
> >In alt.usage.english and alt.english.usage , the comment is
> >occasionally made that a particular usage is "due to laziness." In
> >every case that I can remember, the usage in question was correct for
> >the dialect of the person speaking it, and to ascribe it to laziness
> >was an absurdity.
>
> It never would have occurred to me that an individual or a set of them
> was being accused of laziness when he dropped a final letter, a middle
> letter, or elided two letter etc.
I know full well that I am being lazy when I write half-sentences, elide
letters that I usually put in, don't bother with grammar so much, use
slang or childhood words/phrases, use uncommon allusions without
explanation, write etc.etc. to save on lengthy arguments... Is everyone
else much more careful about their responses?
Jac
Raymond S. Wise
[snip]
> >
> >The quote "In short, Ebonics is no more lazy English than Italian is
> >lazy Latin." is particularly apt, and it reminded me of the situation
> >in French between the prestige dialect, Parisian French, and the
> >dialect spoken in the South of France. In Parisian French, many of the
> >e's which were pronounced in the past no longer are, but there are
> >dialects in which they continue to be pronounced. I am personally
> >acquainted with one person who speaks that way. Although not French,
> >he lived in the South of France as a boy and learned to speak French
> >with the accent of the people of that region. It obviously silly to
> >say that the Parisian French speakers are being "lazy." Of course they
> >are not, they are simply pronouncing the language as they were taught
> >to pronounce it.
>
> Why just look at non-pronounced e's? What about all the
> non-pronounced consonants at the ends of French words? That's
> universal. And not this generation, except for new changes in the
> works, but at one time they were lazy too. Everyone is lazy,
> especially children, and they are "our future".
>
I recently learned that the French word "aujourd'hui" has the
following etymology: It is composed of "au," (best translated here as
"on the"), "jour" ("day"), "de," ("of"), and "hui," (also spelled
"ui," this was an older word for "today"). "Hui," in turn, comes from
Latin "hodie," ("today"), from "hoc die" ("on this day").
It appears that "hui" came to be seen as too short, hence the newer
form. So from the etymological point of view, "aujourd'hui" means "on
the day of today." Curiously, the French now have an expression "au
jour d'aujourd'hui," which, etymologically, is "on the day of on the
day of today."
So, laziness or too much work? Take your pick. :-)
Raymond S. Wise
I believe we are discussing separate issues. My complaint about the
terms "lazy" or "laziness" when discussing English usage concerns the
use of those terms when referring to another person's utterances when
that person is speaking his customary dialect. I just spent several
minutes using Google's Usenet Archive to look at past instances of
this "laziness" charge in posts to alt.usage.english. None of them
seemed justified to me.
What you seem to be describing above is a situation where you are
writing prose which you have the chance to edit, but don't. I suppose
that if you believe you are being lazy by not editing, than you are
being lazy, but writing prose is not the same as speaking your dialect
in your normal fashion. Writing is a language activity, certainly, but
it is an artificial activity, and attempting to write a message in
formal standard English is even more artificial than that. It takes
_extra_ effort to do what is artificial. The words "lazy" or
"laziness," when speaking about writing formal prose, apply to
relatively little people: those who think they should make the extra
effort needed to write formal prose, but do not do so: Such effort
might include such verifying spellings, checking the grammar used in
long, complicated sentences (which are extremely artificial
constructions), and verifying that the vocabulary one is using does
not contain, for example, regionalisms which might be misunderstood.
However, much of what I just wrote does not apply to an informal
written English, which is what most posts to this group, and most
other groups I have seen, are written in.
And none of what I have written in the last couple of paragraphs
applies to a person speaking in his own dialect, which is, I repeat,
the thing which is objected to most often by those who use the terms
"lazy" and "laziness" when discussing English usage.
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote
> > I know full well that I am being lazy when I write half-sentences, elide
> > letters that I usually put in, don't bother with grammar so much, use
> > slang or childhood words/phrases, use uncommon allusions without
> > explanation, write etc.etc. to save on lengthy arguments... Is everyone
> > else much more careful about their responses?
> What you seem to be describing above is a situation where you are
> writing prose which you have the chance to edit, but don't. I suppose
> that if you believe you are being lazy by not editing, than you are
> being lazy, but writing prose is not the same as speaking your dialect
> in your normal fashion. ...
> And none of what I have written in the last couple of paragraphs
> applies to a person speaking in his own dialect, which is, I repeat,
> the thing which is objected to most often by those who use the terms
> "lazy" and "laziness" when discussing English usage.
But a lot of what I write when being lazy about editing *is* valid in my
own dialect (rural Oxfordshire) but not in my preferred dialect (RP or
formal Oxfordshire). It blurs the line.
When I write "it bain't thee" am I being true to my dialect, lazy,
jocular or something else?
Jac
Dr Robin Bignall
Only you can answer that question: telepathy is not one of my better
senses. But if you do, then it is, or should be, with the knowledge
that some readers may not understand what you mean.
I'd like to bet (not too much: I'm skint) that many British, American,
Australian etc. contributors to these groups would find it difficult
to understand each other on the telephone if their local accents and
dialects were strong. This is the main reason, IMO, for having a
more-or-less common written English which all can understand.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
ps: 'skint' means broke, having run out of funds, in case it's not a
word in common use outside the UK.
Raymond S. Wise
I take it that you are (1) being true to your original dialect, (2)
being lazy if and only if you believe that you should take the effort
to do something else besides what you are in fact doing, (3) being
jocular if and only if you intend to be jocular, in which case
laziness is not involved--being jocular takes an extra effort--or (4)
yes, well, what else is there? I have one idea:
It seems to me that speaking of someone as being "lazy" when speaking
about that person's English usage does not simply involve a discussion
of economy of effort. It is rather a moral statement: That person is
committing the sin of sloth because _he hasn't taken the effort to
learn to speak as I do, or if he has in fact learned how to speak as I
do, he is not takingthe effort this very moment to speak that way._
You would therefore have the curious situation where a person who is
saying "irregardless" and who is using the double negative might very
well be accused of "laziness," even though it takes extra effort to
say the "ir-" in "irregardless" and to say an extra negative when
saying the double negative. What is happening, of course, is that the
pedant believes the "lazy" individual in question _should_ learn to
speak as the pedant does. That the individual in question may have not
the slightest desire to speak as the pedant does is not considered.
Imagine, if you will, a case where the pedant overhears a conversation
between two speakers of a nonstandard dialect, David and Paul. The
pedant may consider David and Paul to be "lazy speakers" because of
their dialect. But suppose further that David is a dialect-shifter. He
speaks the dialect he grew up with when he is around the people who
speak that dialect, but when he is at work, or otherwise speaking to
strangers, he speaks Standard American English. As I understand the
mindset of the pedant (and I may, of course, be wrong), if he were
informed that David was perfectly capable of speaking the standard
dialect, he would very likely _still_ accuse David of "lazy usage"
when speaking the nonstandard dialect. Yet David has taken more effort
to manage his speech abilities than have the vast majority of people!
As an alternative, perhaps the pedant would simply think that David
was being perverse.
I, on the other hand, see a lot of value to dialect-shifting, and
believe that if people were encouraged to do so, you would find many
more people speaking Standard English than now do.
Jacqui
I think I see what you mean. I have two ways of pronouncing certain
things, and if I am speaking to other RP/accented speakers I will
effortlessly use RP - unless consciously making a point (such as
imitating Pam Ayres or The Archers). If I am being lazy, with them, I
will use my own dialect pronunciation without noticing. If I am talking
to old schoolfriends who share my dialect, I will feel awkward if I
shift back to RP without realising - "lazy" seems to be relative and
either version would be "incorrect" to the person hearing it, although I
didn't really intend it to be. (This is most clearly seen with u and e
vowel sounds such as "mum", "bell" and "tea".)
> You would therefore have the curious situation where a person who is
> saying "irregardless" and who is using the double negative might very
> well be accused of "laziness," even though it takes extra effort to
> say the "ir-" in "irregardless" and to say an extra negative when
> saying the double negative. What is happening, of course, is that the
> pedant believes the "lazy" individual in question _should_ learn to
> speak as the pedant does. That the individual in question may have not
> the slightest desire to speak as the pedant does is not considered.
> Imagine, if you will, a case where the pedant overhears a conversation
> between two speakers of a nonstandard dialect, David and Paul. The
> pedant may consider David and Paul to be "lazy speakers" because of
> their dialect. But suppose further that David is a dialect-shifter. He
> speaks the dialect he grew up with when he is around the people who
> speak that dialect, but when he is at work, or otherwise speaking to
> strangers, he speaks Standard American English. As I understand the
> mindset of the pedant (and I may, of course, be wrong), if he were
> informed that David was perfectly capable of speaking the standard
> dialect, he would very likely _still_ accuse David of "lazy usage"
> when speaking the nonstandard dialect. Yet David has taken more effort
> to manage his speech abilities than have the vast majority of people!
Exactly. I do still think I am being lazy when I shift inappropriately,
because I should be aware that my target audience won't follow me and
compensate for that, but I would be quite offended if they thought my
dialect lazy - I probably have a wider vocabulary (?probably? certainly)
than most of my one-dialect friends.
> I, on the other hand, see a lot of value to dialect-shifting, and
> believe that if people were encouraged to do so, you would find many
> more people speaking Standard English than now do.
I suspect that the greatest dialect-shift in UK English is in the
direction of Estuary English, which is not Standard in any desirable
sense. Vocabularies appear to shrink and language becomes aurally
irritating. I'd sooner deal with a wide variety of mono-dialect speakers
than a nation of Estuarians.
jac
Raymond S. Wise
> Raymond S. Wise wrote:
[snip]
> > I, on the other hand, see a lot of value to dialect-shifting, and
> > believe that if people were encouraged to do so, you would find many
> > more people speaking Standard English than now do.
>
> I suspect that the greatest dialect-shift in UK English is in the
> direction of Estuary English, which is not Standard in any desirable
> sense. Vocabularies appear to shrink and language becomes aurally
> irritating. I'd sooner deal with a wide variety of mono-dialect speakers
> than a nation of Estuarians.
>
Your reference to "the greatest dialect-shift" in your last paragraph
appears to be a different phenomenon from the "dialect shifting" I
spoke of when I meant "the ability of a person to speak his original
dialect in some circumstances and a prestige dialect in others." The
reference you made to "dialect-shift" appears to refer to the
widespread replacement of one accent (not dialect)--in this case,
Received Pronunciation--with another accent, Estuary. Both RP speakers
and Estuary speak the same dialect: Standard British English.
When I read what you wrote above it was the first that I have
encountered criticism of Estuary English, and the first time that I
have heard of it as a dialect, that is, having a difference in
vocabulary from Standard English, instead of simply an accent. The
following quote is from a Web page which defines "Estuary English" in
what I take to be the standard definition in the field of linguistics:
From
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/estuary/whatis.htm
The author of the page, John Wells, appears to have impressive
credentials on the subject of accents:
[quote]
Professor Wells is the author of _Accents of English_ and the _Longman
Pronunciation Dictionary._ He is Head of the Department of Phonetics
and Linguistics at University College London -- the Department founded
by Daniel Jones and subsequently headed by the late A.C.Gimson. He
also directs the famous annual UCL Summer Course in English Phonetics.
[end quote]
Professor Wells makes quite clear that Estuary English is an accent,
not, like Cockney, a dialect: "Unlike Cockney, EE is associated with
standard grammar and usage."
One other thought occurs to me: Perhaps you are one of those people
who use "dialect" as meaning "any form of the language besides the
standard form." This is, of course, the older meaning. In linguistics,
however, dialect and accent are separate, and the standard form is as
much a dialect as any other. It is theoretically possible for the same
person to learn to speak the dialect called "Standard British English"
in, as the occasion warrants, the Scots accent, RP, or EE.
I am aware that there are these two meanings of "dialect," but, like
the popular and the technical definition of "slang," it's likely a lot
of confusion will continue to result when people think they are
talking about the same thing, but in fact are not.
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote
> [snip]
>
> > > I, on the other hand, see a lot of value to dialect-shifting, and
> > > believe that if people were encouraged to do so, you would find many
> > > more people speaking Standard English than now do.
> >
> > I suspect that the greatest dialect-shift in UK English is in the
> > direction of Estuary English, which is not Standard in any desirable
> > sense. Vocabularies appear to shrink and language becomes aurally
> > irritating. I'd sooner deal with a wide variety of mono-dialect speakers
> > than a nation of Estuarians.
>
> Your reference to "the greatest dialect-shift" in your last paragraph
> appears to be a different phenomenon from the "dialect shifting" I
> spoke of when I meant "the ability of a person to speak his original
> dialect in some circumstances and a prestige dialect in others." The
> reference you made to "dialect-shift" appears to refer to the
> widespread replacement of one accent (not dialect)--in this case,
> Received Pronunciation--with another accent, Estuary. Both RP speakers
> and Estuary speak the same dialect: Standard British English.
No, I am also talking about vocabulary and the loss of original dialect
words. There's a great deal of "Mockney" (see Jamie Oliver, Nigel
Kennedy et al) in Estuary English and it's a real shame that people are
using that and dropping their own dialect vocabulary - that's why I said
"vocabularies appear to shrink". One homogenous and irritating
unter-dialect instead of several interesting and varied ones.
People who should perhaps speak, say, Oxon and RP are speaking Oxon and
EE, with an increasing influence on EE at the expense of Oxon. They are
not speaking any kind of "standard" English at all.
> When I read what you wrote above it was the first that I have
> encountered criticism of Estuary English,
I'll look up some more for you. It's not favoured.
> and the first time that I
> have heard of it as a dialect, that is, having a difference in
> vocabulary from Standard English, instead of simply an accent. The
> following quote is from a Web page which defines "Estuary English" in
> what I take to be the standard definition in the field of linguistics:
>
> From
> http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/estuary/whatis.htm
>
> The author of the page, John Wells... (snip)
> Professor Wells makes quite clear that Estuary English is an accent,
> not, like Cockney, a dialect: "Unlike Cockney, EE is associated with
> standard grammar and usage."
I'd say it's moving towards definition as a dialect though, since the
vocabulary is quite distinct from Cockney.
> One other thought occurs to me: Perhaps you are one of those people
> who use "dialect" as meaning "any form of the language besides the
> standard form." This is, of course, the older meaning. In linguistics,
> however, dialect and accent are separate,
I know this. ;)
> and the standard form is as
> much a dialect as any other. It is theoretically possible for the same
> person to learn to speak the dialect called "Standard British English"
> in, as the occasion warrants, the Scots accent, RP, or EE.
>
> I am aware that there are these two meanings of "dialect," but, like
> the popular and the technical definition of "slang," it's likely a lot
> of confusion will continue to result when people think they are
> talking about the same thing, but in fact are not.
Agreed. But I did mean dialect.
Jac
Jacqui
> Raymond S. Wise wrote:
> > The author of the page, John Wells... (snip)
> > Professor Wells makes quite clear that Estuary English is an accent,
> > not, like Cockney, a dialect: "Unlike Cockney, EE is associated with
> > standard grammar and usage."
>
> I'd say it's moving towards definition as a dialect though, since the
> vocabulary is quite distinct from Cockney.
Add: and from RP.
Jac
Aaron J Dinkin
> One other thought occurs to me: Perhaps you are one of those people
> who use "dialect" as meaning "any form of the language besides the
> standard form."
How about 'any form of a language including the standard form'? The
standard dialect is still a dialect.
> This is, of course, the older meaning. In linguistics, however, dialect
> and accent are separate,
I don't think that's true. The definition I know of "dialect" identifies a
dialect as any identifiable variant of the language, distinguished by
phonology, morphology, and grammar. The phonological characteristics of any
given dialect are termed its accent.
> and the standard form is as much a dialect as any other.
Of course.
> It is theoretically possible for the same person to learn to speak the
> dialect called "Standard British English" in, as the occasion warrants,
> the Scots accent, RP, or EE.
Mmm, I don't really agree. A different accent makes it a different dialect.
Either that, or speaking Standard British English with a Scots accent is
akin to speaking Spanish with a French accent - using the accent of one
dialect while speaking another.
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Dr Robin Bignall
<Sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Raymond S. Wise wrote:
[..]
>> When I read what you wrote above it was the first that I have
>> encountered criticism of Estuary English,
>
>I'll look up some more for you. It's not favoured.
>
I was surprised that Raymond had only just seen his first criticism of
EE, which, to my ears, is an ugly dialect or accent, innit! ('Innit'
-- isn't it -- is a typical EE expression.) It sounds as though its
speakers are a sandwich short of a picnic, and in shear ugliness is
matched by that exaggerated, sneering, north Derbyshire speech
practised by Dennis Skinner, MP (although quite different from it).
I live just across the border from Essex and I can tell you that the
EE one hears on the BBC is a pale imitation of the real thing as
spoken by the locals. Some of the girls almost sing it, in various
registers, and the slurring makes it very difficult to follow.
>>
>> The author of the page, John Wells... (snip)
>> Professor Wells makes quite clear that Estuary English is an accent,
>> not, like Cockney, a dialect: "Unlike Cockney, EE is associated with
>> standard grammar and usage."
>
>I'd say it's moving towards definition as a dialect though, since the
>vocabulary is quite distinct from Cockney.
>
I'd agree with you.
Incidentally, I presume that Raymond's 'dialect shift' is a different
phenomenon from the one of someone temporarily acquiring a slight
American dialect and accent after a year or two in the States, say,
and slowly losing it on return to the UK.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Raymond S. Wise
> Raymond S. Wise <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > One other thought occurs to me: Perhaps you are one of those people
> > who use "dialect" as meaning "any form of the language besides the
> > standard form."
>
> How about 'any form of a language including the standard form'? The
> standard dialect is still a dialect.
>
No, I meant what I wrote. I, for my part, adhere to the meaning of
"dialect" in which the standard form is recognized as a dialect, but I
was questioning whether Jacqui was one of those people who adhere to
the older meaning, in which the standard form is a not recognized as a
dialect. As it turns out, her use of the word "dialect" agrees with
yours and mine.
> > This is, of course, the older meaning. In linguistics, however, dialect
> > and accent are separate,
>
> I don't think that's true. The definition I know of "dialect" identifies a
> dialect as any identifiable variant of the language, distinguished by
> phonology, morphology, and grammar. The phonological characteristics of any
> given dialect are termed its accent.
>
> > and the standard form is as much a dialect as any other.
>
> Of course.
>
> > It is theoretically possible for the same person to learn to speak the
> > dialect called "Standard British English" in, as the occasion warrants,
> > the Scots accent, RP, or EE.
>
> Mmm, I don't really agree. A different accent makes it a different dialect.
> Either that, or speaking Standard British English with a Scots accent is
> akin to speaking Spanish with a French accent - using the accent of one
> dialect while speaking another.
>
I first learned of this distinction between "accent" and "dialect"
when reading Anthony Burgess's book _A Mouthful of Air: Language,
Languages--Especially English._ Although not a linguist--scientist of
linguistics--Mr. Burgess was knowledgable about the subject, and had
been a teacher of English both to foreign students and to native
speakers. The example of speaking Standard British English with a
Scots accent was his. Another example I would give is speaking
Standard American English with a Southern accent. Furthermore, all
Americans speaking Standard American English are speaking it with
another accent, since there _is nothing like RP in American English._
And I might include myself as an example: Although I grew up in
Central Illinois and still speak with that accent (with perhaps slight
modification), I have abandoned the regionalisms I grew up with
(they're not very useful when living in Minnesota).
Since reading Burgess's book I have run across other writers who make
the distinction. The following, for example, is from _The Concise
Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics_ at
http://www.xrefer.com/entry.jsp?xrefid=570356&secid=.-
[quote]
accent 2
A variety of speech differing phonetically from other varieties: thus,
as in ordinary usage, 'a Southern accent', 'Scottish accents'.
Normally restricted by linguists to cases where the differences are at
most in phonology: further differences, e.g. in syntax, are said to be
between dialects.
[end quote]
Aaron J Dinkin
> Aaron J Dinkin <din...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in message news:<9le1tu$krs$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
>
>> Raymond S. Wise <mpl...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > It is theoretically possible for the same person to learn to speak the
>> > dialect called "Standard British English" in, as the occasion warrants,
>> > the Scots accent, RP, or EE.
>>
>> Mmm, I don't really agree. A different accent makes it a different dialect.
>> Either that, or speaking Standard British English with a Scots accent is
>> akin to speaking Spanish with a French accent - using the accent of one
>> dialect while speaking another.
>
> I first learned of this distinction between "accent" and "dialect"
> when reading Anthony Burgess's book _A Mouthful of Air: Language,
> Languages--Especially English._
<snip>
> Since reading Burgess's book I have run across other writers who make
> the distinction. The following, for example, is from _The Concise
> Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics_
<snip>
> [quote]
>
> accent 2
>
> A variety of speech differing phonetically from other varieties: thus,
> as in ordinary usage, 'a Southern accent', 'Scottish accents'.
> Normally restricted by linguists to cases where the differences are at
> most in phonology: further differences, e.g. in syntax, are said to be
> between dialects.
>
> [end quote]
This doesn't say, however, that differences in phon{ology/etics} with no
concomitant differences in syntax or vocabulary don't constitute a dialect
difference too. C.M. Millward's _Biography of the English Language_ (the
first linguistics-type book I read, and consequently the one which formed
a lot of my impressions on this sort of stuff) says: "A dialect is a
variety of a language distinguished from other varieties in such aspects
as pronunciation, grammar, lexicon, and semantics.... In contrast to
'dialect', which can be applied to linguistic variation of any type, the
term accent refers to phonological characteristics only...." This
certainly suggests that an accent is a special case of a dialect.
If two people's native dialects have the same grammar and vocabulary but
different phonologies, I wouldn't say they have the same native dialect.
Neville X. Elliven
>http://www.stanford.edu/~rickford/papers/SuiteForEbonyAndPhonics.html
>[quote]
>Ebonics is no more lazy English than Italian is lazy Latin.
Is that a defence of Ebonics, or an indictment of Italian?
Alan Jones
I thought "RP" denoted an accent, without any implication of vocabulary?
What are some distinctive aspects (other than accent) of Estuary
English, marking it as different from both Standard British English
(formal or informal) and Cockney?
Alan Jones
Raymond S. Wise
[snip]
>
> Incidentally, I presume that Raymond's 'dialect shift' is a different
> phenomenon from the one of someone temporarily acquiring a slight
> American dialect and accent after a year or two in the States, say,
> and slowly losing it on return to the UK.
Well, the term I used was "dialect shifting." "Dialect shift" was a
term used by Jacqui to indicate seemingly another phenomenon. "Dialect
shifting" is the ability to speak in more than one dialect, usually
used when speaking of those people who speak a nonstandard dialect at
home and with friends and who speak the standard dialect on occasions
when it is warranted, such as when they are at work.
As for the phenomenon you describe, it seems to me that that has
happened to me--the accent I have now is slightly modified, but not
completely changed, from the accent I had when I lived in Central
Illinois. When I discussed this phenomenon recently with a French
couple from the city of Orléans, they pointed out an example of the
same phenomenon from their own experience: the husband's sister had
moved away from Orléans, and although she still spoke with an Orléans
accent, it had become modified from what it was when she actually
lived there.
John Dean
Alan Jones <a...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4ZJe7.13970$6R6.1...@news1.cableinet.net...
>
> > > I'd say it's moving towards definition as a dialect though, since
> the
> > > vocabulary is quite distinct from Cockney.
> >
> > Add: and from RP.
>
> I thought "RP" denoted an accent, without any implication of vocabulary?
>
has begun to lose her more strident Cockney tones & is taking on the
melodious grace of the ''upper classes'' - but her vocabulary is still from
(Shaw's version of) the Covent Garden gutter. This is clearly intended to be
amusing to the audience. As was the advert for Lager based on this where a
'posh bird' has to say 'The water in Majorca don't taste like what it ought
ta' in Estuarine and can only do so by 'refreshing the parts that other
beers don't reach' (''But I thought she was drinking lager?'' ''Shut up'' he
explained)
In England, I don't believe discussion of accents ever strays too far from
discussions of 'class' (or what is perceived as class). It is usually
thought amusing for a RP speaker to incorporate ''vulgarisms'' into their
speech (see the Saint, Bulldog Drummond & almost any hero of 20s / 30s
thrillers) and now it has become even more amusing to incorporate the accent
(Kennedy, Jamie the Twat). Ditto, it has long been a staple of comedy for
''lower class'' characters to aspire to a richer vocabulary, especially if
they get it wrong (Sairey Gamp, o how we laughed!)
It seems that, just at the point where we (UK) are close to abolishing the
idea of class as a determinant of position or achievement, when we don't
care which school you went to (apart from Jeff Archer, but that's only
because he told so many porkies about it), who your parents were (apart from
Guy Ritchie, but that's down to porkies too) and we don't much care whether
you buy your own furniture, we are nevertheless being <Michael Corleone>
pulled back in again <Michael Corleone> by the process of defining people by
how they speak instead of what they say.
For the Record - I speak with a noticeable, but not strong, North-Western
Accent. It's actually central Manchester but people sometimes mistake it for
Scouse.
I don't give a rat's ass *how* people speak. I prefer them to make some
effort to communicate effectively but if they have one accent at their
disposal, that's fine. I *hate* ( & I mean that most sincerely) people who
change their accent for no other reason than make themselves (they think)
more popular. That ranges from the Hyacinth Bouquet phone accent to Harold
Wilson taking elocution lessons so he would sound like a Yorkshireman and
not an Oxford Don.
--
John Dean -- Oxford
I am anti-spammed -- defrag me to reply
Mike Barnes
>I *hate* ( & I mean that most sincerely) people who
>change their accent for no other reason than make themselves (they think)
>more popular. That ranges from the Hyacinth Bouquet phone accent to Harold
>Wilson taking elocution lessons so he would sound like a Yorkshireman and
>not an Oxford Don.
Do you feel similarly about people that change *other* things about
themselves for similar purposes? People who modify their dress, their
hair colour and style, their posture, etc, to make themselves more
attractive?
--
Mike Barnes
Raymond S. Wise
You said earlier that "The standard dialect is still a dialect," which
is my position also. But what is the accent for Standard American
English? There is none. The following is from _Alphabet to Email: How
Written English Evolved and Where It's Heading,_ by linguist Naomi S.
Baron. Baron quotes linguist Henry Lee Smith, "who used his expertise
in dialectology as host of a radio program entitled 'Where Are You
From?'":
[quote]
As a way of keeping awake in [a class he was offering at Barnard on
the history of the English language, Smith] began studying the
regional dialects as spoken by his girl students. He...tried to teach
the girls that good usage is good usage in any part of the country and
that there was no need to cultivate any particular accent to make
themselves socially acceptable. The differences in accents are
geographical and historical, not social.
[end quote]
But it has long been recognized that one could write using "good
usage," no matter what one's native dialect was, and it is from that
realization that "Standard American English" and "Standard British
English" developed. RP may have attached itself to Standard British
English, but it was obviously possible to speak Standard British
English with one's own regional accent. The same with Standard
American English. All that was necessary was for the educated
individual (and this could include the self-educated individual, such
as Mark Twain and H. Allen Smith) to speak as he wrote. Naomi Baron
denies that there is "an American standard language," by which she
means, the context makes clear, a standard dialect with a standard
accent (she specifically denied that "General American" is that
standard). But the dialect itself exists: Standard American English.
It just doesn't have a standard accent.
It seems perverse to me to insist that a person speaking Standard
American English with an Iowan accent is speaking a different dialect
from a person speaking Standard American English with a Boston accent.
Likewise, a person speaking Standard British English with an Estuary
accent is speaking the same dialect as a person speaking Standard
British English with RP. This would be the situation John Wells was
referring to when he said at
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/estuary/whatis.htm
that "Unlike Cockney, EE is associated with standard grammar and
usage." If indeed there is an Estuary English which has nonstandard
grammar and usage, that would be another dialect still.
John Dean
Mike Barnes <mi...@senrab.com> wrote in message
news:crDI2UAtA$e7E...@senrab.com...
No, I don't. Strange, innit? Perhaps it's to do with the fact that dress is
not an original trait to modify but is a fresh choice every day. Ditto
style. Neither of these things is intrinsic like the accent you grow up
with. Changing hair colour through dye or features through surgery is
usually noticeable - 'she's gone blonde' - 'he's had his chins tucked'.
The acquisition of a false accent strikes me as sinister since it is
intended to be undetectable. It is a form of deceit and I don't like it. By
all means try to persuade me to accept it - don't try to get me to dislike
other forms of human activity as well.
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<feilntg3g94g04hrh...@4ax.com>...
>
>
>[snip]
>
>
>>
>> Incidentally, I presume that Raymond's 'dialect shift' is a different
>> phenomenon from the one of someone temporarily acquiring a slight
>> American dialect and accent after a year or two in the States, say,
>> and slowly losing it on return to the UK.
>
>
>Well, the term I used was "dialect shifting." "Dialect shift" was a
>term used by Jacqui to indicate seemingly another phenomenon. "Dialect
>shifting" is the ability to speak in more than one dialect, usually
>used when speaking of those people who speak a nonstandard dialect at
>home and with friends and who speak the standard dialect on occasions
>when it is warranted, such as when they are at work.
>
This is an extremely common phenomenon in the UK, usually referred to
as one's "telephone voice". Time after time I've noticed people
(usually women) chatting to me in their local accent, whatever that
is, in an office. Then the phone rings, and on comes the 'posh'
accent. This is particularly evident in the case of the offices of
'professional' people: doctors, lawyers, some local government
officials etc.
>As for the phenomenon you describe, it seems to me that that has
>happened to me--the accent I have now is slightly modified, but not
>completely changed, from the accent I had when I lived in Central
>Illinois. When I discussed this phenomenon recently with a French
>couple from the city of Orléans, they pointed out an example of the
>same phenomenon from their own experience: the husband's sister had
>moved away from Orléans, and although she still spoke with an Orléans
>accent, it had become modified from what it was when she actually
>lived there.
I know what you mean. I fondly imagine that my accent has become quite
neutral, having lived away from my home town since 1961, worked
internationally for 15 years with people from just about every
country, and lived in London for 12 (before going abroad) and 14
(after returning) years. Then I listen to myself on a tape recorder
and hear that, at the best, I speak 'posh' Nottingham. The change is
only slight. But I have a friend who spent 5 years in the States in
the 1950s and who spoke naturally with a charming 'mid-Atlantic'
accent for 25 years before it faded away.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Aaron J Dinkin
> Aaron J Dinkin <din...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in message news:<9lf6ua$oq7$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
>
>> This doesn't say, however, that differences in phon{ology/etics} with no
>> concomitant differences in syntax or vocabulary don't constitute a dialect
>> difference too. C.M. Millward's _Biography of the English Language_ (the
>> first linguistics-type book I read, and consequently the one which formed
>> a lot of my impressions on this sort of stuff) says: "A dialect is a
>> variety of a language distinguished from other varieties in such aspects
>> as pronunciation, grammar, lexicon, and semantics.... In contrast to
>> 'dialect', which can be applied to linguistic variation of any type, the
>> term accent refers to phonological characteristics only...." This
>> certainly suggests that an accent is a special case of a dialect.
<snip>
> You said earlier that "The standard dialect is still a dialect," which
> is my position also. But what is the accent for Standard American
> English? There is none.
I would say that Standard American English consists of a family of similar
dialects, varying slightly in both phonology and vocabulary. The Standard
American English of New York, with its highways and CINC pronunciations, is a
separate dialect from the Standard American English of California, with freeways
full of CIC speakers.
<snip>
> It seems perverse to me to insist that a person speaking Standard
> American English with an Iowan accent is speaking a different dialect
> from a person speaking Standard American English with a Boston accent.
It seems perfectly natural to me - this is merely a consequence of our differing
understandings of the word "dialect". But even in your restricted understanding
of the word "dialect", there is enough variety of vocabulary within Standard
American English to make it more than one dialect, I think.
Tom Deveson
>This is an extremely common phenomenon in the UK, usually referred to
>as one's "telephone voice". Time after time I've noticed people
>(usually women) chatting to me in their local accent, whatever that
>is, in an office. Then the phone rings, and on comes the 'posh'
>accent. This is particularly evident in the case of the offices of
>'professional' people: doctors, lawyers, some local government
>officials etc.
Thomas Hardy described a similar phenomenon in *Tess of the
d'Urbervilles* (1891) -- it's been described by Raymond Williams as 'one
of the clearest statements of what has become a classical experience of
mobility'.
"Mrs Durbeyfield habitually spoke the dialect; her daughter, who had
passed the Sixth Standard in the National School under a London-trained
mistress, spoke two languages: the dialect at home, more or less;
ordinary English abroad and to persons of quality."
Tom
--
Tom Deveson
Dr Robin Bignall
My mother was very impressed by any man who spoke with a posh accent.
To her, it was a sign of being a 'gentleman'. Bah! Humbug!
(This posting was written using an assumed RP accent. Bet you couldn't
tell!)
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Padraig Breathnach
>
>Mike Barnes <mi...@senrab.com> wrote in message
>news:crDI2UAtA$e7E...@senrab.com...
>> In alt.usage.english, John Dean <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote
>> >I *hate* ( & I mean that most sincerely) people who
>> >change their accent for no other reason than make themselves (they think)
>> >more popular. That ranges from the Hyacinth Bouquet phone accent to
>Harold
>> >Wilson taking elocution lessons so he would sound like a Yorkshireman and
>> >not an Oxford Don.
>>
>> Do you feel similarly about people that change *other* things about
>> themselves for similar purposes? People who modify their dress, their
>> hair colour and style, their posture, etc, to make themselves more
>> attractive?
>>
>No, I don't. Strange, innit? Perhaps it's to do with the fact that dress is
>not an original trait to modify but is a fresh choice every day. Ditto
>style. Neither of these things is intrinsic like the accent you grow up
>with. Changing hair colour through dye or features through surgery is
>usually noticeable - 'she's gone blonde' - 'he's had his chins tucked'.
>The acquisition of a false accent strikes me as sinister since it is
>intended to be undetectable. It is a form of deceit and I don't like it. By
>all means try to persuade me to accept it - don't try to get me to dislike
>other forms of human activity as well.
My first reaction was to agree with Mike. But then I remembered that
both my wife and I speak Irish RP, and our accent would never
disadvantage us in Ireland. We live in an area which has a strong
regional accent, which is not particularly pleasant to our ears. When
our daughter was young she occasionally produced the local vowel
sounds, and we drew her attention to it. She now speaks Irish RP, and
I know that she is happy she does. Have we altered her accent by
intentionally steering her away from regional phonemes? Would Mike
disapprove?
PB
John Dean
Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> wrote in message
news:pkeontcl23anh3528...@4ax.com...
I'm sure Mike will tell us. Can I just clear up my own position? People grow
up with a particular accent for all sorts of reasons - parental & family
influence, locale influence, peer influence. And the process seems quite
continuous. Our daughter had a strong-ish Manc accent when we moved to
Oxford when she was 9. Now she has a fairly neutral accent with some traces
of Manc & some clear Oxon sounds. Our Grandson seems to be developing quite
a pronounced Oxon accent - following his Dad & kids / staff at Nursery I
would guess. I know people who have emigrated to places like Australia &
Canada as adults who have developed a kind of half and half accent. All this
is fine and natural, it seems to me. And if parents want to 'nudge' their
children and the children chooses to respond, also fine. If a kid with a
strong regional accent was boarded out at Eton for 10 years, he might very
well end up speaking RP, because that was the accent in which he learned
much of his vocabulary. Great.
What I *don't* like is the adult who sets out deliberately & with malice
aforethought to change the way they speak. Whether because they feel some
sense of shame at their mother-tongue or because they perceive some
potential advantage from their acquired speech. I can easily understand why
most people aren't bothered by that but it bugs me. It especially bugs me
when the different accents are switched on and off to take advantage of
different situations. By which I mean pandering to different audiences, I
don't mean slipping into natural patterns because of a particular
environment. I tend to get a little broader in speech when talking with
Lancastrians. I don't, however, 'put it on' to make them think I'm ''one of
them'' nor do I put on the less regional accent that is my usual mode of
speech. A gut I worked with used to do periodic stints on the radio, for
which he had a mellifluous voice. I remarked on this to a colleague who, it
turned out, had known the guy from childhood. ''He doesn't talk like that
when he hits his thumb with the hammer'' was the verdict. And that's about
the standard. If you woke up disorientated and moved to exclaim ''Where am
I? Who are you? What's been happening?'', in what accent would you speak,
not having any thought for presentation?
No doubt Joanna Lumley speaks like Joanna Lumley and Mike Reid speaks like
Mike Reid Okey-Dokey
Perhaps I am really railing against a world in which people can be judged
(and for that matter lynched) on account of their speech patterns. Though
if anyone knows why I should feel so strongly about this, perhaps you could
let me know.
Don Aitken
<john...@fragmsn.com> wrote:
>
>Alan Jones <a...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:4ZJe7.13970$6R6.1...@news1.cableinet.net...
>>
[snip]
>In England, I don't believe discussion of accents ever strays too far from
>discussions of 'class' (or what is perceived as class). It is usually
>thought amusing for a RP speaker to incorporate ''vulgarisms'' into their
>speech (see the Saint, Bulldog Drummond & almost any hero of 20s / 30s
>thrillers) and now it has become even more amusing to incorporate the accent
>(Kennedy, Jamie the Twat). Ditto, it has long been a staple of comedy for
>''lower class'' characters to aspire to a richer vocabulary, especially if
>they get it wrong (Sairey Gamp, o how we laughed!)
>It seems that, just at the point where we (UK) are close to abolishing the
>idea of class as a determinant of position or achievement, when we don't
>care which school you went to (apart from Jeff Archer, but that's only
>because he told so many porkies about it), who your parents were (apart from
>Guy Ritchie, but that's down to porkies too) and we don't much care whether
>you buy your own furniture, we are nevertheless being <Michael Corleone>
>pulled back in again <Michael Corleone> by the process of defining people by
>how they speak instead of what they say.
>For the Record - I speak with a noticeable, but not strong, North-Western
>Accent. It's actually central Manchester but people sometimes mistake it for
>Scouse.
Interesting. As another Northerner (born and brought up in Cumberland)
I would suggest that the full impact of this is confined to southern
England, or perhaps even to the London area (in a fairly wide sense).
That is the area for which it is true to say that all accents are
class accents, and for which Shaw's statement that "no Englishman can
open his mouth without making another Englishman hate him" comes close
to being true. The development of "Estuary", unpleasant as most of us
find it, is the beginning of a move away from this.
I have always thought it a great advantage of my own accent that it is
not a class marker in the same way, and would think that the same
applies to most regional accents. You obviously do not feel that way
about yours. Maybe there is a difference between the perception of
"city" accents (Birmingham, Manchester) and "regional" ones
(Lancashire, Yorkshire, West Country).
--
Don Aitken
Padraig Breathnach
>
>Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> wrote in message
>news:pkeontcl23anh3528...@4ax.com...
>> "John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Mike Barnes <mi...@senrab.com> wrote in message
>> >news:crDI2UAtA$e7E...@senrab.com...
>> >>
>
reaction was to agree with Mike when I meant to say that I was
inclined to agree with your good self.
[...]
>
>What I *don't* like is the adult who sets out deliberately & with malice
>aforethought to change the way they speak. Whether because they feel some
>sense of shame at their mother-tongue or because they perceive some
>potential advantage from their acquired speech. I can easily understand why
>most people aren't bothered by that but it bugs me. It especially bugs me
>when the different accents are switched on and off to take advantage of
>different situations. By which I mean pandering to different audiences, I
>don't mean slipping into natural patterns because of a particular
>environment.
>
Such behaviour can bug me too, but maybe we are being unfair. There
are social disadvantages to having certain accents, and perhaps it is
reasonable to avoid such disadvantages. The fault, I suggest, is not
ascribable to those who change their accents as much as to those who,
by their reactions, give them an incentive to make the change.
I dislike pretentiousness. Sometimes an adopted accent appears
pretentious, and that is why it can irritate me. In Ireland, Irish RP
is not generally regarded as a badge of social superiority, and its
adoption does not generally appear pretentious. There is another
accent, which might be described as Hibernicised English RP, which
does appear pretentious, and which is often derided here. People who
assume such an accent annoy the hell out of me. I think that it is
because its users are implying some obscure form of social
superiority.
>I tend to get a little broader in speech when talking with
>Lancastrians. I don't, however, 'put it on' to make them think I'm ''one of
>them'' nor do I put on the less regional accent that is my usual mode of
>speech. A gut I worked with used to do periodic stints on the radio, for
>which he had a mellifluous voice. I remarked on this to a colleague who, it
>turned out, had known the guy from childhood. ''He doesn't talk like that
>when he hits his thumb with the hammer'' was the verdict. And that's about
>the standard. If you woke up disorientated and moved to exclaim ''Where am
>I? Who are you? What's been happening?'', in what accent would you speak,
>not having any thought for presentation?
>
I do not think that my accent varies with my company. But other
components of my speech do, particularly my vocabulary and the
complexity of my syntax. I hope that this is due to good manners
rather than being patronising. If I know or suspect that the person to
whom I am speaking has a limited vocabulary or limited language
skills, I edit my utterances. I imagine that most AUE subscribers do
likewise.
>Perhaps I am really railing against a world in which people can be judged
>(and for that matter lynched) on account of their speech patterns. Though
>if anyone knows why I should feel so strongly about this, perhaps you could
>let me know.
I have mentioned my dislike of pretentiousness (or even pretension).
Perhaps you share it. But it is really difficult to know where to draw
the lines.
PB
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>If I know or suspect that the person to
>whom I am speaking has a limited vocabulary or limited language
>skills, I edit my utterances. I imagine that most AUE subscribers do
>likewise.
Often, but don't I have fun when I run across a person with an
unlimited vocabulary.
Charles Riggs
John Dean
Don Aitken <don-a...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:3b7c07eb...@news.freeuk.net...
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:38:08 +0100, "John Dean"
> <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Alan Jones <a...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:4ZJe7.13970$6R6.1...@news1.cableinet.net...
> >>
>
> not a class marker in the same way, and would think that the same
> applies to most regional accents. You obviously do not feel that way
> about yours.
I don't know where you get that from. I don't see my accent as a class
marker. I've had the same accent all my life and, if I understand the
concept correctly, my 'class' has changed.
Matthew M. Huntbach
> On 16 Aug 2001 00:45:33 -0700, mpl...@my-deja.com (Raymond S. Wise)
> wrote:
> >Well, the term I used was "dialect shifting." "Dialect shift" was a
> >term used by Jacqui to indicate seemingly another phenomenon. "Dialect
> >shifting" is the ability to speak in more than one dialect, usually
> >used when speaking of those people who speak a nonstandard dialect at
> >home and with friends and who speak the standard dialect on occasions
> >when it is warranted, such as when they are at work.
> This is an extremely common phenomenon in the UK, usually referred to
> as one's "telephone voice". Time after time I've noticed people
> (usually women) chatting to me in their local accent, whatever that
> is, in an office. Then the phone rings, and on comes the 'posh'
> accent. This is particularly evident in the case of the offices of
> 'professional' people: doctors, lawyers, some local government
> officials etc.
It can go the other way round - you use standard English in everyday
life, but revert to your local accent when appropriate. I find this
happens as a councillor when I speak to my constituents on the London
councl estate I represent - I soon find myself speaking the council estate
estuary English of my youth. I've noticed my wife's accent takes on a
distinct Indian tone when she speaks with her mother (who's from Goa),
although there isn't a trace of it in her normal speaking voice.
Matthew Huntbach
Mike Barnes
>"John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote:
>>
>>Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> wrote in message
>>news:pkeontcl23anh3528...@4ax.com...
>>> "John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote:
>>> >Mike Barnes <mi...@senrab.com> wrote in message
>>> >news:crDI2UAtA$e7E...@senrab.com...
>>> >>
>>> >> Do you feel similarly about people that change *other* things about
>>> >> themselves for similar purposes? People who modify their dress, their
>>> >> hair colour and style, their posture, etc, to make themselves more
>>> >> attractive?
>>> >>
>>> >No, I don't. Strange, innit?
>>>
>>> My first reaction was to agree with Mike.
>>>
>>I'm sure Mike will tell us.
>>
>I'm sure he will -- but through inattention I suggested that my first
>reaction was to agree with Mike when I meant to say that I was
>inclined to agree with your good self.
I have a train to catch (to Edinbugger for a Festival weekend), and
currently have only enough time to point out that I didn't express any
opinion at all.
--
Mike Barnes
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
Absolutely. The 'telephone voice' is just one direction, towards
'poshness'. The reverse often occurs. My first wife's father once
accused her (only half in jest) of losing her working-class roots
because she had been to university, lived a middle-class life, and
'talked posh'. (The 'poshness' was partially due to the elocution
training she had as a young girl, paid for by him!) I always thought
that she spoke in quite a marked Derbyshire accent when with her
family; much stronger than normal.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Frances Kemmish
The first time I took my fiancé (now my husband) to meet my family, he
complained that he couldn't understand a word I said when I was
talking to my family. My mother took him down the village to meet an
elderly friend of hers, who had scarcely ever been more than ten miles
from the village, so that he could hear what a real Derbyshire accent
sounded like.
From the time I started at grammar school, neighbours and family
complained that I was talking "posh". I think we did tend to pick up
an "educated" accent - even more so when we went to university - but I
don't think it was a calculated thing.
I have noticed that nowadays when I am in England, I hear more
regional accents on TV and radio, so no doubt there has been a lot of
change. I am guessing that the broadening of access to universities
and other higher education institutions, means that they are less
dominated by people educated in public schools (UK variety), and so
there is likelihood that the people you are with will speak with an RP
accent. My nephew graduated from Oxford last year, and still speaks
with a marked Nottingham accent.
Fran
Tony Cooper
> I have noticed that nowadays when I am in England, I hear more
> regional accents on TV and radio, so no doubt there has been a lot
of
> change. I am guessing that the broadening of access to universities
> and other higher education institutions, means that they are less
> dominated by people educated in public schools (UK variety), and so
> there is likelihood that the people you are with will speak with an
RP
> accent.
At one time, there was what I knew as the "BBC accent": no regional
accent, but an only just slightly posh overtone. All presenters
seemed to have it.
I think the change to hear regional accents is a trendy thing to be
part of the people. I wouldn't be surprised to hear "owt" or "orf" in
a broadcast today.
What is "RP", by the way? I don't know that abbreviation. Really
plonking? Rather posh? Right pondian? Raspingly peculiar?
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Fabian
"Tony Cooper" <tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:9lmbh1
> What is "RP", by the way? I don't know that abbreviation. Really
> plonking? Rather posh? Right pondian? Raspingly peculiar?
/reseIvd pr@na:ntsijeIS@n/
--
--
Fabian
ghajn f'wicc kahal ra ghajn f'wicc hamar
dak l-ghajn jisbah dan l-ghajn
qal l-ghajn l-ewwel
imma baxx, mhux gholi
Don Aitken
RP is "Received Pronunciation", meaning, I suppose, "received from the
authority on high which lays down right and wrong in these matters".
It certainly used to mean the kind of "BBC accent" you describe. It
was also known as the Oxford accent, and was effectively confined to
the upper middle class. Linguists today seem to use the term in a much
broader sense; certainly much of what I have read recently implies
that it is the native dialect of something more than a tiny minority
of the English population. If anyone has a more up-to-date defintion I
would be interested to know it.
--
Don Aitken
Raymond S. Wise
I was rather surprised the other day, while talking with a British
acquaintance who works as a technical writer, that he did not use the
terms "RP" or "Received Pronunciation." The term he used for the
accent in question was "Oxford English." It turns out that "RP" is
used by only a minority:
From _The Oxford Companion to the English Language,_ (C) 1992, at
http://www.xrefer.com/entry.jsp?xrefid=443604&secid=.1.-
[quote]
Attitudes to RP.
The terms _Received Pronunciation_ and _RP_ are not widely known
outside the immediate circle of English-language professionals, but
the form that they refer to is widely known as the spoken embodiment
of a variety or varieties known as _the King's English, the Queen's
English, BBC English, Oxford English,_ and _Public School English:_
see entries. It is often informally referred to by the British middle
class as a _BBC accent_ or a _public school accent_ and by the working
class as _talking proper_ or _talking posh._ In England, it is also
often referred to simply as _Standard English._ Its 'advanced' (that
is, distinctive upper-class and royal) form is sometimes called
_la-di-dah_ (as in talking la-di-dah) or a _cut-glass accent,_
especially if used by people judged as not really 'from the top
drawer'. RP has been described by many of its users and admirers in
the UK and elsewhere as the best pronunciation for BrE, for the
countries influenced by BrE, or for all users of English everywhere.
Americans do not normally subscribe to this view, but many of them
admire RP as the representative accent of educated BrE while some
associate it with the theatre and, in men, with effeminacy.
[end quote]
If you go to www.xrefer.com and do searches for
RP
and for
Received
you will find links to several other short articles about Received
Pronunciation.
My British acquaintance was not aware of the term "Estuary English"
either, or of the phenomenon itself. But he has spent many years over
here in the States with only occasional trips to the UK.
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>I was rather surprised the other day, while talking with a British
>acquaintance who works as a technical writer, that he did not use the
>terms "RP" or "Received Pronunciation." The term he used for the
>accent in question was "Oxford English." It turns out that "RP" is
>used by only a minority:
An even smaller minority, only one I know of, refers to Irish RP. If
this term has an accepted meaning, I doubt if it is widely known.
Charles Riggs
Raymond S. Wise
RP is an accent, not a dialect. I made reference in an earlier post to
Anthony Burgess's book _A Mouthful of Air: Language,
Languages--Especially English._ In that book, Burgess speaks of
"Standard British English with RP.[1]" The combination constitutes one
prestige form of English. In the same book, Burgess notes that it is
possible to speak Standard English with a Scots accent, a point with
which at least one other poster disagreed, but which seems obvious to
me, just as it is possible for a Southerner to speak Standard American
English with a Southern accent.
As I mention in another post in this thread, if you go to
www.xrefer.com and do a search for
RP
and
Received
you will find several short articles concerning Received
Pronunciation.
Note:
[1]Actually, I don't remember the details, whether Burgess said
"Standard English with RP" or "Standard British English with RP." It
seems to me he also made reference to "Standard Written English." (I
think I'm going to have to re-read the book!)
Fabian
"Charles Riggs" <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message
news:dqjuntour6ie0pjq5...@4ax.com...
According to the Cambridge Encyclopedia (sic) of English, RP is spoken
by about 3% of the UK population.
John Dean
It's interesting that I had never heard the term before Padraig used it but
I felt instinctively I knew what he meant - an accent clearly Irish in
origin but without any indicators that would suggest from which *part* of
the country the speaker came. Which, I suppose, is what RP is in English - a
non-regionalised but clearly national accent. Does every language have its
RP?
Padraig Breathnach
>An even smaller minority, only one I know of, refers to Irish RP. If
>this term has an accepted meaning, I doubt if it is widely known.
>
An rud is annamh, is íontach.
And you seemed to understand what I wrote, so the term is rippling
through the language community.
PB
Padraig Breathnach
>
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message
>news:dqjuntour6ie0pjq5...@4ax.com...
>>
>> this term has an accepted meaning, I doubt if it is widely known.
>>
>I felt instinctively I knew what he meant - an accent clearly Irish in
>origin but without any indicators that would suggest from which *part* of
>the country the speaker came.
>
the educated middle class. I accept that the phrase is not widely
used, but the accent is generally recognised.
A speaker who is well known to UK residents is Terry Wogan. Singer
Sinead O'Connor comes close, but has a touch of south Dublin in her
accent. Former President Mary Robinson also comes close, but her
accent is tinged with an "Anglo" quality associated by most Irish with
members of the old ascendancy class (I don't feel inclined to go in
depth in Irish populist political attitudes).
> Which, I suppose, is what RP is in English - a
>non-regionalised but clearly national accent. Does every language have its
>RP?
>
It seems likely to me.
PB
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>"Tony Cooper" <tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<9lmbh1$2th$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>...
That is one of the most accurate descriptions I've seen. I only
learned of RP through AEU, and always called it BBC English.
>[end quote]
>
>
>If you go to www.xrefer.com and do searches for
>
>RP
>
>and for
>
>Received
>
>you will find links to several other short articles about Received
>Pronunciation.
>
>
>My British acquaintance was not aware of the term "Estuary English"
>either, or of the phenomenon itself. But he has spent many years over
>here in the States with only occasional trips to the UK.
I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30 years?) as
a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls speak. Why Essex
girls were singled out, I have no idea, except that the accent sounds
a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are still supposed to have
bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto shoes, are all called Tracy
and are somewhat giggly and wanton. So the story goes.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Dan Seriff
> I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30 years?) as
> a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls speak. Why Essex
> girls were singled out, I have no idea, except that the accent sounds
> a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are still supposed to have
> bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto shoes, are all called Tracy
> and are somewhat giggly and wanton. So the story goes.
Similar to the bizzare Valley Girl phenomenon of the early '90s? They
were all supposed to have names like Candy, Buffy, and Stacy (sometimes
spelled with an <i> instead of <y>), and used "like" and "y'know"
between every other pair of words. They frequently wore pink. I think
the name comes from the San Bernardino Valley, or some other valley in
California. I grew up on the east coast, near DC, so my exposure to the
real thing was minimal, however.
--
Daniel Seriff
micro...@sericap.com
http://members.tripod.com/microtonal
Honesty means never having to say "Please don't flush me down the toilet!"
- Bob the Dinosaur
When the ratings go up, it's like the whole world is made of donuts.
- Brak
Richard Fontana
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
> > I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30 years?) as
> > a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls speak. Why Essex
> > girls were singled out, I have no idea, except that the accent sounds
> > a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are still supposed to have
> > bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto shoes, are all called Tracy
> > and are somewhat giggly and wanton. So the story goes.
>
> Similar to the bizzare Valley Girl phenomenon of the early '90s?
Early 1980s.
meirm...@erols.com
<Sirlawren...@hotmail.com> posted:
>meirm...@erols.com wrote:
>> Raymond S. Wise posted:
>>
>> >In alt.usage.english and alt.english.usage , the comment is
>> >occasionally made that a particular usage is "due to laziness." In
>> >every case that I can remember, the usage in question was correct for
>> >the dialect of the person speaking it, and to ascribe it to laziness
>> >was an absurdity.
>>
>> It never would have occurred to me that an individual or a set of them
>> was being accused of laziness when he dropped a final letter, a middle
>> letter, or elided two letter etc.
>
>I know full well that I am being lazy when I write half-sentences, elide
>letters that I usually put in, don't bother with grammar so much, use
>slang or childhood words/phrases, use uncommon allusions without
>explanation, write etc.etc. to save on lengthy arguments... Is everyone
>else much more careful about their responses?
Hardly. I type a lot in usenet and it's improved my typing, but I
certainly have lower standards here than elsewhere.
I meant there are two sets of lazy behaviour. Lazy behaviour in the
past that has resulted in normally elided words etc. in standard
English or any other kind, for which current speakers are not
responsible.
There is also lazy speaking now, sometimes people sharing the same
lazy mistakes and sometimes having unique ones of their own. I
thought Ray was talking about established usages. And even new usages
seem to be established by people unidentifiable, or so unusual we
can't be sure it is or will be established. At any rate, I don't
blame any one individual.
>Jac
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 17 years
Richard Fontana
I can't speak of the pre-1945 era, but in the US there's Postwar Prestige
Standard. Depending on how you define it, this could be a
non-region-specific collection of different deregionalized accents
associated with the relatively prosperous and cosmopolitan subsets of the
middle classes, or, more specifically and with greater historical and
linguistic accuracy, an accent native to New York City which other accents
in that first collection are trying to approximate, sometimes with
good results, but often quite badly.
Raymond S. Wise
[snip]
>
> > Which, I suppose, is what RP is in English - a
> >non-regionalised but clearly national accent. Does every language have its
> >RP?
> >
> It seems likely to me.
>
I don't know where I read it, and I don't speak Italian, so I can't
judge the statement by myself, but I have read that there is no
"Standard Italian" in a context where it appeared that the reference
was to an accent, not a dialect. That is, there is no one prestige
Italian accent. However, as far Standard Written Italian, I think that
Italian preceded the other Romance languages in having a standard
written form, and Dante was, of course, important in that regard.
Dan Seriff
I dunno. It was still going strong when I was in highschool.
Richard Fontana
> Richard Fontana wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Dan Seriff wrote:
> >
> > > Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30 years?) as
> > > > a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls speak. Why Essex
> > > > girls were singled out, I have no idea, except that the accent sounds
> > > > a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are still supposed to have
> > > > bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto shoes, are all called Tracy
> > > > and are somewhat giggly and wanton. So the story goes.
> > >
> > > Similar to the bizzare Valley Girl phenomenon of the early '90s?
> >
> > Early 1980s.
>
> I dunno. It was still going strong when I was in highschool.
Certainly "Valley Girls" seem still to be alive in public consciousness,
which is an interesting thing. I suppose you could say that about hippies
too. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "going strong"; did you go
to high school in "The Valley"?
Blinky the Shark
news:3B7FF605...@sericap.com:
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
>> I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30
>> years?) as a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls
>> speak. Why Essex girls were singled out, I have no idea, except
>> that the accent sounds a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are
>> still supposed to have bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto
>> shoes, are all called Tracy and are somewhat giggly and wanton.
>> So the story goes.
>
> Similar to the bizzare Valley Girl phenomenon of the early '90s?
> They were all supposed to have names like Candy, Buffy, and Stacy
> (sometimes spelled with an <i> instead of <y>), and used "like"
> and "y'know" between every other pair of words. They frequently
> wore pink. I think the name comes from the San Bernardino Valley,
> or some other valley in California. I grew up on the east coast,
> near DC, so my exposure to the real thing was minimal, however.
That valley is the San Fernando Valley (in which I live), which is
essentially the northern part of the Los Angeles sprawl. The
Hollywood Hills (the tail end of the Santa Monica Mountains), down
which you see houses sliding every winter when it rains a lot,
separate it from the Los Angeles Basin, proper.
The 1982 pop song "Valley Girl" (written by Frank Zappa, featuring
his daughter Moon Unit) exposed those, like, you know, speech
patterns mainstream. Ditto the film 1983 film "Valley Girl",
although without as broad a brush.
I've always personally considered upspeak (ending nonquestions with
inflections that make them sound like questions) part of that whole
"Valley thing", although I'm not sure that's strictly accurate.
--
Blinky "Please Don't Gag Me With A Spoon" Shark
Richard Fontana
> I've always personally considered upspeak (ending nonquestions with
> inflections that make them sound like questions) part of that whole
> "Valley thing", although I'm not sure that's strictly accurate.
Not really, because it was characteristic of a whole generation of
speakers, not those specific to one narrow region or subculture. What's
notable about Valley Girls, and maybe Essex Girls in the UK if Robin is
right, is that certain general linguistic changes and innovations going on
in American English (SE England BrE in the UK case) were
first noticed in one highly visible (but probably not particularly
influential) youth subculture -- a female-specific subculture to boot.
I'm not even certain that "uptalk" was particularly associated with Valley
Girls to begin with, though it began to be noticed in young speakers aroun
the same time -- the early 1980s, fer sher.
meirm...@erols.com
<no....@box.invalid> posted:
>
>
>The 1982 pop song "Valley Girl" (written by Frank Zappa, featuring
>his daughter Moon Unit) exposed those, like, you know, speech
Moon Unit was on that NPR news game show this weekend, forget the
name. She seemed very nice, down to earth, had a great sense of
humor, and could really laugh at other people's jokes. She said her
new book is 17.2% autobiography.
My imitation hippy friend managed to get his daughter named Barbara
Moonbeam Xxxxxx. We lost touch and I don't know how she turned out,
but her father's no Frank Zappa.
>patterns mainstream. Ditto the film 1983 film "Valley Girl",
>although without as broad a brush.
Maria Conlon
Richard Fontana wrote
>I can't speak of the pre-1945 era, but in the US there's Postwar
Prestige
>Standard.
You've used this term -- Postwar Prestige Standard [PPS] -- before. At
the risk of revealing ignorance where knowledge (or at least
familiarity)
ought to be, I must ask where this term comes from. Is it used in places
other than aue?
>...Depending on how you define it,
Is there a definition for it that is recognized and generally accepted?
>...this could be a
>non-region-specific collection of different deregionalized accents
Meaning accents that are so deregionalized that most people cannot tell
which region they started out in? Would this be the "homogenized"
English that one often hears on network TV?
>associated with the relatively prosperous and cosmopolitan subsets of
the
>middle classes, or, more specifically and with greater historical and
>linguistic accuracy, an accent native to New York City which other
accents
>in that first collection are trying to approximate, sometimes with
>good results, but often quite badly.
Why New York City? It would seem to me that few people would try to
approximate a New York City accent when attempting any sort of standard
USA accent. For those of us who are not New Yorkers, the NYC accent is
often impossible to fully understand. The same could be said of accents
anywhere along the East Coast, in the south, and in the southwest.
On the other hand, accents in the far west (California, Oregon,
Washington, and maybe in the states that touch the Pacific states) and
in parts of the Midwest seem closer to "standard."
Is my understanding (of what PPS would be) dictated by where I live? Is
your understanding based on where you live? Does a New York City accent
represent a "standard" to you? Last question: Do you have any difficulty
understanding what people in the Midwest and far west are saying?
I hope you don't think my questions and comments are rude. They are not
meant to be. I am curious, that's all, and hope you can enlighten me.
Maria (Tootsie)
Blinky the Shark
news:84b0otchb8klou8nt...@4ax.com:
> In alt.english.usage on 19 Aug 2001 20:19:05 GMT Blinky the Shark
><no....@box.invalid> posted:
>
>>
>>
>>The 1982 pop song "Valley Girl" (written by Frank Zappa,
>>featuring his daughter Moon Unit) exposed those, like, you know,
>>speech
>
> Moon Unit was on that NPR news game show this weekend, forget the
> name. She seemed very nice, down to earth, had a great sense of
> humor, and could really laugh at other people's jokes. She said
> her new book is 17.2% autobiography.
I've worked with Moon's brother Ahmet; he's a quite likable sort. As
I recall, he's named after Ahmet Ertegun, who, amid other
accomplishments and associations, founded Atlantic Records.
--
Blinky
Gawaine
'asked me' sounds terribly barbarous.
Earle D Jones
*
Moon and Ahmet had another brother, Dweezil Zappa. Dweezil and Ahmet
cut a few albums together, including "Shampoohorn".
Moon Zappa, in spite of her Valley Girl fame (the song was recorded when
she was 14) is really a thoughtul, intelligent, and sympathetic person.
She is 34 this year. Her new book, "America the Beautiful" is about to
be released (or was recently released) by Dell Publishing.
Read more about her, and see her picture at:
http://www.uoregon.edu/~splat/Moon_Unit_Zappa.html
earle
*
PS: Mr. Greenjeans was *not* Frank Zappa's father, in spite of what you
might have heard.
ej
*
Fac me cocleario vomere
(Gag me with a spoon!)
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>
>>An even smaller minority, only one I know of, refers to Irish RP. If
>>this term has an accepted meaning, I doubt if it is widely known.
>>
>An rud is annamh, is íontach.
Well, I tried ROT13, got "Na ehq vf naanzu, vf íbagnpu", and still
don't have a clue.
>And you seemed to understand what I wrote, so the term is rippling
>through the language community.
I understood well enough that you were applying an English term to
Hiberno-English, thinking there may be a parallel, RPwise, even though
we don't have a Queen, but I still don't accept your claim that there
is a regionless Irish accent or your implication that our friend's
slight south Dublin accent is, in some way, substandard to the accent
of the "educated middle class". Some of my best friends are, or were,
South Dubliners and they spoke just fine.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>I can't speak of the pre-1945 era, but in the US there's Postwar Prestige
>Standard. Depending on how you define it, this could be a
>non-region-specific collection of different deregionalized accents
>associated with the relatively prosperous and cosmopolitan subsets of the
>middle classes, or, more specifically and with greater historical and
>linguistic accuracy, an accent native to New York City which other accents
>in that first collection are trying to approximate, sometimes with
>good results, but often quite badly.
You could define it that way and might be especially inclined to do so
if you had some New York roots. I've also heard that the best, most
"standard", English in the country is heard in Washington, DC but then
I'm a DC-suburb man and could possibly be biased in my thinking.
Charles Riggs
Richard Fontana
Well, in fact I would say that District of Columbia Postwar Prestige
Standard is the next-best thing to [New York City] Postwar Prestige
Standard. I think they get almost everything right except for the MINMINM
stuff.
Anyway, don't you mean you're a Laurel suburb man?
Blinky the Shark
news:earle.jones-9BB6...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com:
> In article <Xns9102A610F4...@209.155.56.91>,
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>> meirm...@erols.com wrote in
>> news:84b0otchb8klou8nt...@4ax.com:
>>
>> > In alt.english.usage on 19 Aug 2001 20:19:05 GMT Blinky the
>> > Shark
>> ><no....@box.invalid> posted:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>The 1982 pop song "Valley Girl" (written by Frank Zappa,
>> >>featuring his daughter Moon Unit) exposed those, like, you
>> >>know, speech
>> >
>> > Moon Unit was on that NPR news game show this weekend, forget
>> > the name. She seemed very nice, down to earth, had a great
>> > sense of humor, and could really laugh at other people's
>> > jokes. She said her new book is 17.2% autobiography.
>>
>> I've worked with Moon's brother Ahmet; he's a quite likable
>> sort. As I recall, he's named after Ahmet Ertegun, who, amid
>> other accomplishments and associations, founded Atlantic
>> Records.
>
> *
> Moon and Ahmet had another brother, Dweezil Zappa. Dweezil and
> Ahmet cut a few albums together, including "Shampoohorn".
They (Ahmet and Dweezil) also did a TV series together: "Happy Hour".
> Moon Zappa, in spite of her Valley Girl fame (the song was
> recorded when she was 14) is really a thoughtul, intelligent, and
> sympathetic person. She is 34 this year. Her new book, "America
> the Beautiful" is about to be released (or was recently released)
> by Dell Publishing.
The youngest, Diva Muffin Zappa, has done a bit of film work, but I
don't see anything at the IMDB that I'd consider notable.
--
Blinky
Richard Fontana
>
> Richard Fontana wrote
>
> >I can't speak of the pre-1945 era, but in the US there's Postwar
> Prestige
> >Standard.
>
> You've used this term -- Postwar Prestige Standard [PPS] -- before. At
> the risk of revealing ignorance where knowledge (or at least
> familiarity)
> ought to be,
Oh, you shouldn't worry about that.
> I must ask where this term comes from. Is it used in places
> other than aue?
Yes; I've used it in Real Life too.
> >...Depending on how you define it,
>
> Is there a definition for it that is recognized and generally accepted?
Well, you'd have to define "recognized". The definition is still a work
in progress. I'm getting less inclined to favor what's called the
Generous Definition of PPS, the more I learn about it and its close
cousins.
> >...this could be a
> >non-region-specific collection of different deregionalized accents
>
> Meaning accents that are so deregionalized that most people cannot tell
> which region they started out in?
That's the basic idea. That's what all these accents, True-PPS (which
includes NYCPPS and DC-PPS, but possibly little else) and Imitation-PPS,
have in common. All *obvious* regionalisms are attenuated. Many
regionalisms remain, of course -- just consider the merry/marry/Mary
issue.
> Would this be the "homogenized"
> English that one often hears on network TV?
Sort of. If you listen closely to it you start to hear regionalisms.
> >associated with the relatively prosperous and cosmopolitan subsets of
> the
> >middle classes, or, more specifically and with greater historical and
> >linguistic accuracy, an accent native to New York City which other
> accents
> >in that first collection are trying to approximate, sometimes with
> >good results, but often quite badly.
>
>
> Why New York City?
Everything points to New York City, and the era 1945-1960, as the
critical place and time of germination of this accent, True Postwar
Prestige Standard. Makes sense if you think about it. Until the 1960s
New York was still the unquestioned and unrivalled cultural and
intellectual capital of the United States. Most significantly, the
broadcast journalism industry, including the infant sub-industry of
broadcast TV journalism, was headquartered there. The most advanced
versions of (Generously-Defined) Postwar Prestige Standard seem to be
those native to New York City, and in particular the Post-Tonkin
variety.
> It would seem to me that few people would try to
> approximate a New York City accent when attempting any sort of standard
> USA accent. For those of us who are not New Yorkers, the NYC accent is
> often impossible to fully understand. The same could be said of accents
> anywhere along the East Coast, in the south, and in the southwest.
You're thinking of *other* sorts of New York City accents, such as the
lampooned "Brooklynese". I'm contending that people in other parts of the
country, particularly the postwar rising middle classes, began (slowly) to
imitate the newer fashionable, cosmopolitan accents that were coming out
of New York. Few realized that such accents were *native* to New York,
but in fact they were. The *original* version(s) of PPS were situated
in New York, and all of the important developments in postwar prestige
accents seem to have happened there first. Hey, look, I'd
like for none of this to be true, but the evidence suggests that it is.
> On the other hand, accents in the far west (California, Oregon,
> Washington, and maybe in the states that touch the Pacific states) and
> in parts of the Midwest seem closer to "standard."
Listen to them a bit more closely and you'll see this isn't
so. Most Western U.S. accents are hopelessly regional. Now, yes, in
the cosmopolitan districts of the West Coast and among relatively
educated speakers there has, in recent decades,
been some move towards adopting the accent features of New York City
Postwar Prestige Standard. (This process was aided, no doubt, by the
great many New Yorkers who migrated to the populous L.A. and San Francisco
areas during the postwar decades.)
> Is my understanding (of what PPS would be) dictated by where I live? Is
> your understanding based on where you live?
I'd say the answer to your first question is no. Your understanding of
PPS is influenced by popular mythology. The answer to your second
question is sort of. In my quest to understand just what PPS is it has
been a great help to me that (a) I speak it, and (b) I grew up in the area
where PPS was born, that is to say, New York.
> Does a New York City accent
> represent a "standard" to you?
You have to understand that there are probably hundreds of distinct New
York City accents. Only a few of these fall within the PPS class. You've
heard these accents, I'm sure, but you never realized they were New York
City accents, because you think of New York City accents as the familiar
mythologized sort.
So, yes, *a* New York City accent represents a "standard" to me, and, in
particular, Postwar Prestige Standard.
> Last question: Do you have any difficulty
> understanding what people in the Midwest and far west are saying?
Yes, I certainly do. It varies by region of course, and by the degree to
which the speaker has deregionalized his or her accent, in favor of an
approximation to New York City Postwar Prestige Standard. I've heard
people from certain Detroit suburbs who had accents *very* close to
PPS. I never had trouble understanding them, no. But I was once on a
plane where the flight attendant had a Chicago accent so thick that I
really couldn't understand what she was saying, which would have been a
bad thing had there been an emergency in flight. Same is true of the far
west. Some of them, the ones with relatively prestigious accents, are
easy to understand. Others I can't understand at all; what I hear sounds
more or less like gibberish. Of course, if I have the opportunity to
listen more closely and at length to such speech I begin to understand it
better.
I have to say, with respect to the Midwest, that people in the
"lower" Midwest are easier to understand than those in the upper Midwest,
but it's a huge generalization. The American accent that I would say is
*furthest or farthest* from PPS is that of Central Wisconsin.
This is not an East Coast vs. rest-of-the-country thing. Most East Coast
accents do not resemble True-PPS at all.
> I hope you don't think my questions and comments are rude. They are not
> meant to be. I am curious, that's all, and hope you can enlighten me.
I fear I have done little to enlighten you, but I have tried my best.
R J Valentine
In alt.usage.english Richard Fontana <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
...
} I have to say, with respect to the Midwest, that people in the
} "lower" Midwest are easier to understand than those in the upper Midwest,
} but it's a huge generalization.
...
There may well be something to that. One time while I was in the Army, a
discussion got around to accents, and one guy allowed as how nobody could
guess where he was from by his accent. So my gears started clicking and I
eliminated all the regional accents and came up with a city that I had no
experience with whatsoever, so in the 500 milliseconds that you get in the
Army to react to most things (ObTrivia: How do you stop a formation
marching in the fog when the fog lifts just as the front rank is five feet
from the edge?) I said with a straight face as if it were the most obvious
thing in the world, "St. Louis, Missouri." Well, some flabber was gasted
that day.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:r...@smart.net>
Charles Riggs
Nope: Fairfax and Arlington counties in Virginia; the towns of
Kensington and Olney in Maryland; and the neighborhood of Capitol Hill
in the city itself. You must be thinking of Pat, one of my girlfriends
in those days.
Charles Riggs
Brian J Goggin
<chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:47:13 GMT, Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie>
>wrote:
>>An rud is annamh, is íontach.
>Well, I tried ROT13, got "Na ehq vf naanzu, vf íbagnpu", and still
>don't have a clue.
!
Tony Cooper will help you, although I wouldn't trust his spelling.
bjg
Padraig Breathnach
>On Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:47:13 GMT, Padraig Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie>
>wrote:
>
>>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>>
>>>An even smaller minority, only one I know of, refers to Irish RP. If
>>>this term has an accepted meaning, I doubt if it is widely known.
>>>
>>An rud is annamh, is íontach.
>
>Well, I tried ROT13, got "Na ehq vf naanzu, vf íbagnpu", and still
>don't have a clue.
>
You thought that I had written rot? What you needed was a language
bot: "What's rare is wonderful". Or you might look out for the range
of sugar sachets which carry Gaelic sayings and their translations.
>>And you seemed to understand what I wrote, so the term is rippling
>>through the language community.
>
>I understood well enough that you were applying an English term to
>Hiberno-English, thinking there may be a parallel, RPwise, even though
>we don't have a Queen, but I still don't accept your claim that there
>is a regionless Irish accent or your implication that our friend's
>slight south Dublin accent is, in some way, substandard to the accent
>of the "educated middle class". Some of my best friends are, or were,
>South Dubliners and they spoke just fine.
>
I think my accent does not betray my geographic origins more
specifically than my being Irish. The same applies to many people of
my acquaintance.
I did not mean to imply that a south Dublin accent was inferior: it's
just different from RP. But while we are on the question, I can
categorise Sinead's accent with slightly more precision: Irish RP with
an undertone of Dún Laoghaire. It is an accent typical of many middle
class people south of Dublin city.
In general, the Irish people are not much bothered about accents, and
do not use them much as badges of social status. Note that this is a
generalisation. There are exceptions, and I fear that there may be
some drift towards making social distinctions based on accent.
Reasonable clarity of speech is preferred, so certain accents could be
disadvantageous if not moderated a little. Some accents are not
readily comprehensible to people outside the immediate area where they
occur. Examples: Dublin north inner city; areas of Cork city; west
Kerry. I do not mean that people from these places need to shed their
accents: it helps if they slow down a little (rapid speech is
characteristic of the three place) and make some adjustments in the
articulation of particular phonemes. In effect, communication is made
easier if people move a bit towards Irish RP.
Such points are by no means particular to Ireland. The first time I
visited Manchester I was astonished at how difficult I found it to
understand the English there. I still find the Newcastle accent
difficult. Mancunians and Geordies who move from their home areas
frequently modify their accents a little (some modify a lot, but that
is generally not necessary for effective communication).
So what point am I making? I have been rabbiting on without a thesis,
but I think that I have managed to suggest that RP serves two
purposes. First, it can serve as a class marker. It seems to me that
it is this function which is most noted, particularly in England.
Second, it is the most-readily comprehended language of a place, and
aids effective oral communication.
Can members of the academy tell me if there exist Scottish RP and
Welsh RP?
[As I write this, I have the radio on, and am listening to the popular
broadcaster Pat Kenny. I paused, and listened to his accent. I would
categorise it as Irish RP and, to my ear, it does not reveal what part
of Ireland he comes from. My test might be compromised because I
actually know the answer to within 100 metres -- the street on which
he was reared is about 200 metres long.]
PB
Matthew M. Huntbach
> >What is "RP", by the way? I don't know that abbreviation. Really
> >plonking? Rather posh? Right pondian? Raspingly peculiar?
> RP is "Received Pronunciation", meaning, I suppose, "received from the
> authority on high which lays down right and wrong in these matters".
> It certainly used to mean the kind of "BBC accent" you describe. It
> was also known as the Oxford accent, and was effectively confined to
> the upper middle class. Linguists today seem to use the term in a much
> broader sense; certainly much of what I have read recently implies
> that it is the native dialect of something more than a tiny minority
> of the English population.
Most people in south-east England would speak English with distinct
Estuary tones. In other parts of England, there'd be various regional
features. Of course there are matters of gradation in these, with RP
sliding into the others, but only a tiny minority would speak true RP.
Matthew Huntbach
Matthew M. Huntbach
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> > I think the term came about relatively recently (last 20-30 years?) as
> > a TIC comment on the way the (in)famous Essex Girls speak. Why Essex
> > girls were singled out, I have no idea, except that the accent sounds
> > a bit dumb, and the girls themselves are still supposed to have
> > bouffant hairstyles and 4-inch stiletto shoes, are all called Tracy
> > and are somewhat giggly and wanton. So the story goes.
> Similar to the bizzare Valley Girl phenomenon of the early '90s? They
> were all supposed to have names like Candy, Buffy, and Stacy (sometimes
> spelled with an <i> instead of <y>), and used "like" and "y'know"
> between every other pair of words. They frequently wore pink. I think
> the name comes from the San Bernardino Valley, or some other valley in
> California. I grew up on the east coast, near DC, so my exposure to the
> real thing was minimal, however.
I thought "Valley Girls" came from rather wealthy and privileged
backgrounds. In that case, nothing at al like the Essex girl,
who would typically have a manual worker for a father, and work
as a secretary in London.
Matthew Huntbach
Matthew M. Huntbach
> I don't know where I read it, and I don't speak Italian, so I can't
> judge the statement by myself, but I have read that there is no
> "Standard Italian" in a context where it appeared that the reference
> was to an accent, not a dialect. That is, there is no one prestige
> Italian accent. However, as far Standard Written Italian, I think that
> Italian preceded the other Romance languages in having a standard
> written form, and Dante was, of course, important in that regard.
Italian is a made up language. Before the unification of Italy, the
language spoken in the various states differed wildly, to the point
where it would be more correct to think in terms of different languages
rather than just dialects. At that time, the language of Florence, as
used by Dante, was chosen as the base on which a standard Italian
was constructed.
A similar situation eisted in France. Up to the time of the French
revolution, most of the population of France did not speak French.
Matthew Huntbach
Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
>What I *don't* like is the adult who sets out deliberately & with malice
>aforethought to change the way they speak. Whether because they feel some
>sense of shame at their mother-tongue or because they perceive some
>potential advantage from their acquired speech. I can easily understand why
The main potential advantage I would see would be so that I could
be understood more easily. I hadn't realized that's such a crime.
That means that I will tend to adjust how I speak. I will avoid
using my localisms and will start picking up and using
there-localisms. Some phones may start changing as well. I really
don't like making it difficult for others to understand me. When in
Roman, etc..
>most people aren't bothered by that but it bugs me. It especially bugs me
>when the different accents are switched on and off to take advantage of
>different situations. By which I mean pandering to different audiences, I
In general use, why else would one switch accents?
>don't mean slipping into natural patterns because of a particular
>environment. I tend to get a little broader in speech when talking with
By "pandering", do you mean "showing consideration for"? <eg>
>Lancastrians. I don't, however, 'put it on' to make them think I'm ''one of
>them'' nor do I put on the less regional accent that is my usual mode of
Nor I, but if someone mistook me for a native speaker (not
likely), it wouldn't bother me.
>speech. A gut I worked with used to do periodic stints on the radio, for
>which he had a mellifluous voice. I remarked on this to a colleague who, it
>turned out, had known the guy from childhood. ''He doesn't talk like that
>when he hits his thumb with the hammer'' was the verdict. And that's about
>the standard. If you woke up disorientated and moved to exclaim ''Where am
>I? Who are you? What's been happening?'', in what accent would you speak,
>not having any thought for presentation?
In whatever dialect I had most recently been using heavily
(unless I had decided to revert).
>No doubt Joanna Lumley speaks like Joanna Lumley and Mike Reid speaks like
>Mike Reid Okey-Dokey
>
>Perhaps I am really railing against a world in which people can be judged
>(and for that matter lynched) on account of their speech patterns. Though
>if anyone knows why I should feel so strongly about this, perhaps you could
>let me know.
I hope so. Otherwise, your view doesn't make much sense to me.
I like to communicate clearly. If that means I adopt another's
dialect (to whatever degree), then so be it.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Tony Cooper
> >>An rud is annamh, is íontach.
>
> >Well, I tried ROT13, got "Na ehq vf naanzu, vf íbagnpu", and still
> >don't have a clue.
> Tony Cooper will help you, although I wouldn't trust his spelling.
Let's not take this any fada.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Brian J Goggin
<tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Brian J. Goggin wrote:
>
>> >>An rud is annamh, is íontach.
>>
>> >Well, I tried ROT13, got "Na ehq vf naanzu, vf íbagnpu", and still
>> >don't have a clue.
>
>> Tony Cooper will help you, although I wouldn't trust his spelling.
>
>Let's not take this any fada.
Inti? Or a jot?
bjg
Maria Conlon
>Maria said:
>> I hope you don't think my questions and comments are rude. They are
not
>> meant to be. I am curious, that's all, and hope you can enlighten me.
>I fear I have done little to enlighten you, but I have tried my best.
Hmmm. Am I so hard to enlighten, then?
Just kidding, Richard. I appreciate your reply and feel I have a better
understanding now of this matter.
Thanks.
Maria (Tootsie)
Maria Conlon
Gene Wirchenko ended his post with:
>I like to communicate clearly. If that means I adopt another's
>dialect (to whatever degree), then so be it.
That's good to hear, because I do the same thing. It's almost
automatic -- not planned at all. (Sometimes when I realize what I'm
doing, I think I'm little more than an echo coming out of a mirror.)
When I visit family in Tennessee, my Midwest accent starts to fade
almost immediately. I never quite reach the point of "southern drawl,"
but the way I talk (including the words I use) certainly changes. I
couldn't stop it if I tried. When I get back to Michigan, it usually
takes a full day, at least, to return to "normal" -- whatever *that* is
for me.
The same thing happens just about anywhere I go. I do think it helps in
getting acquainted with people, which I like to do.
Just call me chameleon.
Maria (Tootsie)
Charles Riggs
wrote:
I appreciated the explanation, Padraig. I can easily recognise a
number of different accents in Ireland and generally have no trouble
localizing a person to Donegal, Cork City, south Dublin, or north
Dublin, for some examples. What I'm not sure I could do is recognize
an RP Irish accent, if we agree to accept that term, when I hear one.
I've spent some time in south Dublin and hear clear differences
between an educated speaker, a college professor say, and a typical
store clerk but I still hear some "south Dublin" in the professor.
Maybe a good example of RP Irish would be an RTE1 TV news announcer's
accent since RP English and BBC English are often equated. I'll listen
more carefully the next time I hear the news to see if I can pick up a
regional hint, not that that will prove anything conclusively.
Charles Riggs
M.J.Powell
>visited Manchester I was astonished at how difficult I found it to
>understand the English there.
It took me quite a while to tune my ear to their accent.
>So what point am I making? I have been rabbiting on without a thesis,
>but I think that I have managed to suggest that RP serves two
>purposes. First, it can serve as a class marker. It seems to me that
>it is this function which is most noted, particularly in England.
>Second, it is the most-readily comprehended language of a place, and
>aids effective oral communication.
>
>Can members of the academy tell me if there exist Scottish RP and
>Welsh RP?
That's a very sore point in Wales. The language and pronunciation varies
considerably from north to south. The Welsh used on S4C, the Welsh TV
channel, is different again. Southern Welsh seems to be a slovenly
version of northern Welsh, and S4C Welsh is said to be so correct that
even northerners can't understand it easily.
Henry Kelly, of Classic FM radio station, seems to me to have a
regionless Irish accent.
I was astonished to find that the Cork accent was very close to the West
Wales accent.
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Padraig Breathnach
>>Can members of the academy tell me if there exist Scottish RP and
>>Welsh RP?
>
>That's a very sore point in Wales. The language and pronunciation varies
>considerably from north to south. The Welsh used on S4C, the Welsh TV
>channel, is different again. Southern Welsh seems to be a slovenly
>version of northern Welsh,
>
I take it that you are from north Wales.
>and S4C Welsh is said to be so correct that
>even northerners can't understand it easily.
>
>Henry Kelly, of Classic FM radio station, seems to me to have a
>regionless Irish accent.
>
Close, but not quite -- his Dublin origins are detectable. Des Lynam
has a regionless Irish accent.
>I was astonished to find that the Cork accent was very close to the West
>Wales accent.
>
That it is, bhoy.
PB
M.J.Powell
Breathnach <padr...@iol.ie> writes
>"M.J.Powell" <mi...@pickmere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>Can members of the academy tell me if there exist Scottish RP and
>>>Welsh RP?
>>
>>That's a very sore point in Wales. The language and pronunciation varies
>>considerably from north to south. The Welsh used on S4C, the Welsh TV
>>channel, is different again. Southern Welsh seems to be a slovenly
>>version of northern Welsh,
>>
>I take it that you are from north Wales.
No, the other end!
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Mike Page
<padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
[of Henry Kelly]
>>
>Close, but not quite -- his Dublin origins are detectable. Des Lynam
>has a regionless Irish accent.
>
Are we thinking of the same Des Lynam - football commentator?
Not Irish at all I'd say. Maybe the one I'm thinking about has
an 'h'.
Mike Page, BF(UU)
Let the ape escape for e-mail
Padraig Breathnach
>On Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:25:48 GMT, Padraig Breathnach
><padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>[of Henry Kelly]
>>>
>>Close, but not quite -- his Dublin origins are detectable. Des Lynam
>>has a regionless Irish accent.
>>
>Are we thinking of the same Des Lynam - football commentator?
>Not Irish at all I'd say. Maybe the one I'm thinking about has
>an 'h'.
>
We are talking about the same Des. He is from Limerick (near where bjg
now lives). The surname is normally spelt with an 'h', but I am not
sure about this instance -- were he a print journalist, I would be
more likely to know how he spelt his name.
PB
Laura F Spira
I have met Des Lynam. He was certainly charming enough to be Irish but
he did not have a discernible Irish accent.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
The family background is right, but I'd have thought the Sharons and
Traceys more likely to be shop-assistants, hairdressers, waitresses,
check-out girls or, maybe, receptionists.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Matthew M. Huntbach
Maybe, although I think part of the "Essex" stereotype comes about from
people with poor backgrounds having a reasonable amount of money due to
working in London - think also of the stereotypical "barrow boy become
broker". Our Essex girl would have a pretty low-grade office post, typing
pool stuff, but would feel confident about herself due to this being a
step up from her parents.
Matthew Huntbach
John Dean
Dr Robin Bignall <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:cdl5otgnpvltpms83...@4ax.com...
I would say the real 'white shoes big hair' Sharons & Traceys would be
hairdressers or receptionists but not shop assistants, waitresses or
check-out dollies. They will also be 'models' 'presenters' and
'demonstrators' as well as aerobics instructors.
--
John Dean -- Oxford
I am anti-spammed -- defrag me to reply
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
I think that would be true for the Midlands, too. There was a time
when the mythical Birmingham girl had the position that the Essex girl
has today, and certainly a job in an office would seem to be a step
up.
I don't know what it was like for boys in the London area, as I came
here as an adult, and there's a much wider choice of jobs in a huge
city. In Nottingham there were three main employers: Players
(tobacco), Raleigh (cycles) and Ericson (electrical), plus a mine or
two and many small companies in the lace market.
Opinions were divided. On the one hand were the mines, where sons
followed fathers through several generations, and the three large
companies mentioned above, where one had to have a relative working in
one in order to stand a chance of getting a job. In the '50s they were
considered to be jobs for life if one could get in: not well-paid, but
one would not starve. On the other, some working-class fathers wanted
their sons to have a white-collar job. A bank clerk was considered to
be steady, and the peak of respectability, or teaching for the really
'brainy' sons.
It's sad to remember that few working-class parents, even those
without sons, considered it necessary to educate girls beyond the age
of 16.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Matthew M. Huntbach
> In Nottingham there were three main employers: Players
> (tobacco), Raleigh (cycles) and Ericson (electrical), plus a mine or
> two and many small companies in the lace market.
My father's father came from the family which owned one of these
Nottingham lace companies, which apparently is still in existence and
still bears the name "Huntbach".
Matthew Huntbach
Mike Page
<padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>da...@pagedm.orang.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Page) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:25:48 GMT, Padraig Breathnach
>><padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>>
>>[of Henry Kelly]
>>>>
>>>Close, but not quite -- his Dublin origins are detectable. Des Lynam
>>>has a regionless Irish accent.
>>>
>>Are we thinking of the same Des Lynam - football commentator?
>>Not Irish at all I'd say. Maybe the one I'm thinking about has
>>an 'h'.
>>
>We are talking about the same Des. He is from Limerick (near where bjg
>now lives). The surname is normally spelt with an 'h', but I am not
>sure about this instance -- were he a print journalist, I would be
>more likely to know how he spelt his name.
>
Interesting, he sounds English to Laura and me but regionless
Irish to you. A while back Garry thought, not Garrison Keiller -
the 'Notes from' one - was English whereas to the Brits he is
clearly American. This suggests there's a kind of accent
blindness which can work in two directions. Where does Wogan go?
His accent roams around a bit, but when he is not doing the stage
Irish is he a better example of regionless Irish?
Padraig Breathnach
>On Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:18:45 GMT, Padraig Breathnach
><padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>>da...@pagedm.orang.fsnet.co.uk (Mike Page) wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:25:48 GMT, Padraig Breathnach
>>><padr...@iol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>[of Henry Kelly]
>>>>>
>>>>Close, but not quite -- his Dublin origins are detectable. Des Lynam
>>>>has a regionless Irish accent.
>>>>
>>>Are we thinking of the same Des Lynam - football commentator?
>>>Not Irish at all I'd say. Maybe the one I'm thinking about has
>>>an 'h'.
>>>
>>We are talking about the same Des. He is from Limerick (near where bjg
>>now lives). The surname is normally spelt with an 'h', but I am not
>>sure about this instance -- were he a print journalist, I would be
>>more likely to know how he spelt his name.
>>
>
>Interesting, he sounds English to Laura and me but regionless
>Irish to you. A while back Garry thought, not Garrison Keiller -
>the 'Notes from' one - was English whereas to the Brits he is
>clearly American. This suggests there's a kind of accent
>blindness which can work in two directions. Where does Wogan go?
>His accent roams around a bit, but when he is not doing the stage
>Irish is he a better example of regionless Irish?
>
Perhaps the interesting problem is getting a good fix on any
"regionless" accent.
Where does Wogan go? A pretty unarguable case of regionless Irish. I
think that he also has Limerick associations, but most of his
education happened in Dublin.
There are Irish people who sound English to most other Irish people,
but sound Irish to English people. I was talking to one such person
recently, and he told me that he found it to be difficult to take --
nobody accepted him as one of their own.
PB
Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
>The same thing happens just about anywhere I go. I do think it helps in
>getting acquainted with people, which I like to do.
>
>Just call me chameleon.
Chamariaconleon?
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall (docr...@ntlworld.com) wrote:
I'm pleased to hear that. I haven't been back home since my mother
died in '94 but already by then many of the old workshops had been
turned into highly 'des res' apartments. I used to cycle there in the
early '50s a few times per week to collect and deliver long-johns for
my mother. She had an industrial sewing machine at home and sewed the
gussets into them. It was to make some extra money, of course, but
without the scandal of her going out to work. "What? Her husband can't
support his family?" Such things were important in those days, despite
most able-bodied women having to do mens' jobs during the war. Of
course it didn't fool anybody, because the machine was so powerful
that it used to rock the house, and those beside it, when in
operation.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Roberta Davies
>
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >
> > >> >Well, the term I used was "dialect shifting." "Dialect shift" was a
> > >> >term used by Jacqui to indicate seemingly another phenomenon. "Dialect
> > >> >shifting" is the ability to speak in more than one dialect, usually
> > >> >used when speaking of those people who speak a nonstandard dialect at
> > >> >home and with friends and who speak the standard dialect on occasions
> > >> >when it is warranted, such as when they are at work.
> > >
> > >> This is an extremely common phenomenon in the UK, usually referred to
> > >> as one's "telephone voice". Time after time I've noticed people
> > >> (usually women) chatting to me in their local accent, whatever that
> > >> is, in an office. Then the phone rings, and on comes the 'posh'
> > >> accent. This is particularly evident in the case of the offices of
> > >> 'professional' people: doctors, lawyers, some local government
> > >> officials etc.
> > >
> > >It can go the other way round - you use standard English in everyday
> > >life, but revert to your local accent when appropriate. I find this
> > >happens as a councillor when I speak to my constituents on the London
> > >councl estate I represent - I soon find myself speaking the council estate
> > >estuary English of my youth. I've noticed my wife's accent takes on a
> > >distinct Indian tone when she speaks with her mother (who's from Goa),
> > >although there isn't a trace of it in her normal speaking voice.
> > >
> > Absolutely. The 'telephone voice' is just one direction, towards
> > 'poshness'. The reverse often occurs. My first wife's father once
> > accused her (only half in jest) of losing her working-class roots
> > because she had been to university, lived a middle-class life, and
> > 'talked posh'. (The 'poshness' was partially due to the elocution
> > training she had as a young girl, paid for by him!) I always thought
> > that she spoke in quite a marked Derbyshire accent when with her
> > family; much stronger than normal.
> >
>
> The first time I took my fiancé (now my husband) to meet my family, he
> complained that he couldn't understand a word I said when I was
> talking to my family. My mother took him down the village to meet an
> elderly friend of hers, who had scarcely ever been more than ten miles
> from the village, so that he could hear what a real Derbyshire accent
> sounded like.
>
> From the time I started at grammar school, neighbours and family
> complained that I was talking "posh". I think we did tend to pick up
> an "educated" accent - even more so when we went to university - but I
> don't think it was a calculated thing.
>
> I have noticed that nowadays when I am in England, I hear more
> regional accents on TV and radio, so no doubt there has been a lot of
> change. I am guessing that the broadening of access to universities
> and other higher education institutions, means that they are less
> dominated by people educated in public schools (UK variety), and so
> there is likelihood that the people you are with will speak with an RP
> accent. My nephew graduated from Oxford last year, and still speaks
> with a marked Nottingham accent.
My husband Colin's normal accent might be roughly described as Londonish
(not
Cockney, but North London) with a dash of Australian. But all it
takes is an hour of Australian-based TV and the Ozzie really comes out!
He doesn't realise it until it's pointed out to him.
He can also put on just about any accent, from South African to Scouse.
(Except Geordie, which he maintains is impossible for any non-native to
understand or copy.)
In contrast, his brother lived in Australia for about 50 years and never
lost (or even greatly diminished) his original Dorset accent. "Oo arr,
I be Awr-straylian," he'd say, and narrowly avoid getting beaten up in
pubs.
Robbie