Who owns English language?
Philip Page
I was wondering what everyone's thought's were on the "ownership" of the
English language. Is this an outdated idea or not?
Harvey V
<philip...@btinternet.com> said:
If we're voting, I'd say it *is* an outdated idea; the language is too
widely distributed to speak of ownership.
Harvey
John Dean
Philip Page <philip...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9e674m$dah$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> Dear all,
> I was wondering what everyone's thought's were on the "ownership" of the
> English language. Is this an outdated idea or not?
>
>
That will be four and sixpence please
--
John Dean -- Oxford
I am anti-spammed -- defrag me to reply
Arty Smokes
"Philip Page" <philip...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9e674m$dah$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> English language. Is this an outdated idea or not?
I own it. You own it. Everyone who speaks English owns their own words.
The "Queen's English" is outdated, since more people speak in
Eastender's-type accents.
--
Arty
http://www.smokindesign.co.uk
There is a light that never goes out...
Phil C.
"Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9e6gml$u$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Philip Page" <philip...@btinternet.com> wrote in
message
> news:9e674m$dah$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> > I was wondering what everyone's thought's were on the
"ownership" of the
> > English language. Is this an outdated idea or not?
>
> I own it. You own it. Everyone who speaks English owns their
own words.
> The "Queen's English" is outdated, since more people speak
in
> Eastender's-type accents.
On the one hand no-one owns it or contols it in the sense that
French and Dutch are contolled. On the other hand it isn`t
simply a free for all. It has rules, or attempted rules, of
grammar and style which vary over time and geography. The more
relevant issue is perhaps the influences which create,
maintain and guide these rules. Who decides what "correct"
English should be? How does a certain grammarian or dictionary
come to be considered _the_ authority?
-- .
Phil C.
________________________________________
philandwoody*at*meem*dot*freeserve*dot*co*dot*uk
Arty Smokes
"Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9e857b$hob$2...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
>Who decides what "correct"
> English should be? How does a certain grammarian or dictionary
> come to be considered _the_ authority?
Interesting question. I'd say that Fowler represents the authority on
Grammar, but everyone has their personal favourite when it comes to
dictionaries. It's not just the size of them that counts....
Samb1925
English is "owned" by anyone who speaks it. It is entirely flexible and
changes moment by moment according to the popularity of new words or ways of
expressing them.
This is the enormous advantage it has over the more strictly manacled
languages.
Sam
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> I was wondering what everyone's thought's were on the "ownership" of the
> English language.
I haven't responded to this, largely because someone already said what I
wanted to say ("I own it, and I'm starting to charge royalties now.").
"owernership" is generally a collection of exclusive rights, including
o Usage rights (the right to use it)
o Disposal rights (the right to sell/transfer the rights)
o The right to exclusively say it's yours.
Leasing out something is temporarily transfering usage rights, for
example. There can also be limits on usage rights. (e.g., You can own
land which you are not allowed to build on.) There can also be limits on
disposal rights. (eg, you can own land that you are not allowed to
subdivide.) There can be limits on the exclusiveness of usage rights (you
can own land that includes public right of ways). The right to say it's
yours is something that comes up in copyright. You can transfer all other
rights to some publisher, but still insist that you be called the
"author".
OK. Now that we've got the notion that "ownership" is really a bundle of
rights about what you can do with something, and that the bundle can vary
from case to case, particularly with respect to the type of property.
Now with a language.
o No one or group has any kind of legally recognized exclusive right
to use it. Everyone can use it. (However, we create shibboliths (sp?)
which are hoped to be usable only by certain groups, at least for some
time.)
o No one can claim authorship, or be indentified as its creator.
o As nobody has any exclusive rights, there are no rights that could
be transferred. Thus disposal rights are out of the picture.
So there are no exclusive rights at all. The question of ownership
simply doesn't make sense.
As for usage "authorities". No one has any exclusive rights there, and
for the most part they are entirely ignored, except in places like this
newsgroup.
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg
I have recently moved, see http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/contact.html
Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
From line IS valid, but use reply-to.
Phil C.
<{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010522...@lehel.goldmark.p
rivate...
> As for usage "authorities". No one has any exclusive rights
there, and
> for the most part they are entirely ignored, except in
places like this
> newsgroup.
I really don`t think that`s true. People are very concerned
about correctness in language even if they don`t consult
authorities directly. We notice the bits of the language that
are prone to variable use but the huge, agreed central corpus
is so instinctive to us that we scarcely notice it until we
come across a bit that is difficult or arguable. Non-native
speakers and the parents of young (and not so young) children
will be much more aware of the need for correctness because
they see "mistakes" that others would simply never make. It`s
a bit like driving becoming so instinctive that we can forget
that there`s a highway code and think that driving on the left
is "natural".
On the one hand there is clearly no absolute authority and we
enjoy a good deal of leeway. On the other hand anyone who
doesn`t adopt conventional usages (in whatever circles they
mix) is looked upon as eccentric, illiterate, nerdy or
whatever. If nobody adopted conventional usage the language
would simply cease to be. Language only exists collectively.
Most of us do not like to be excluded and rush to conform.
Every discussion in this NG about "correct" usage hits that
tension between freedom of choice, the need for conformity and
the the question of who decides what conformity should be.
The degree to which the language changes tends to be grossly
exaggerated. We notice neologisms, slang etc. but it tends to
be the same ephemeral bits of the language that are constantly
changing. I was reading early C19th newspaper reports
recently. Style has changed but the basic language is almost
identical to modern English. Language is actually changing far
less than it did in previous centuries.
I received a business letter recently from someone whom I know
to be a graduate who used the form "I would not of done it".
Now I would say that for that person in that context that is
simply wrong - unless a person wishes to look foolish. Would
anyone disagree? Whether it is "wrong" in every dialect and
patois or for all time I wouldn`t like to say. But for as long
as we are concerned to be "correct" in some way we will look
to authorities of some kind.
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
Can't argue with that, Phil, but what was he or she a graduate in?
(See my last post on specialisation.) My last formal instruction in
English was when I was 17, but:
- I have an interest in the use of English
- I read several tens of thousands of books since then.
I can imagine graduates in many subjects who, if they do not read very
much for pleasure, have little idea of the structure and grammar of
English except what they learned or did not learn at school.
A great many people read in Britain, even if it is only a tabloid.
Tabloids (apart from the 'Sun' headlines) are usually written in
competent English by competent journalists. Yet, having read, these
people seem to absorb nothing and come out with writing that is barely
literate. I have often wondered why nothing sticks as the words,
sentences and grammar go through their systems.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Laura F Spira
>
<snip Phil's interesting discussion >
>
> Can't argue with that, Phil, but what was he or she a graduate in?
> (See my last post on specialisation.) My last formal instruction in
> English was when I was 17, but:
> - I have an interest in the use of English
> - I read several tens of thousands of books since then.
I had never before thought about how many books I might have read in my
life, but that does sound like an *awful* lot to me.
>
> I can imagine graduates in many subjects who, if they do not read very
> much for pleasure, have little idea of the structure and grammar of
> English except what they learned or did not learn at school.
>
> A great many people read in Britain, even if it is only a tabloid.
> Tabloids (apart from the 'Sun' headlines) are usually written in
> competent English by competent journalists. Yet, having read, these
> people seem to absorb nothing and come out with writing that is barely
> literate. I have often wondered why nothing sticks as the words,
> sentences and grammar go through their systems.
The converse is also interesting. Our son, who writes professionally,
has actually read very little (although he can bluff his way in almost
any literary conversation). I have always been puzzled as to where he
acquired his vast and diverse vocabulary, as well as his talent.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Matt Bloomer
<la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote:
>The converse is also interesting. Our son, who writes professionally,
>has actually read very little (although he can bluff his way in almost
>any literary conversation). I have always been puzzled as to where he
>acquired his vast and diverse vocabulary, as well as his talent.
When I was in Waterstones in Cambridge during my Easter break, I
noticed a book. I don't remember the exact title of it (something
like 'How to Bluff in Literary Conversations') but what it was was a
synopsis of two hundred or so classics along with various other little
bits and pieces (I think there were points to raise for each book to
make oneself look clever). I thought it'd be horrible - it'd take a
lot of the fun out of reading all those books if the conclusion was
already known to the reader!
--
Matt Bloomer * mailto:maj...@btinternet.com
* http://www.envy.nu/plosch *
'They were lying and they conned me into No. 1. I was hoodwinked.'
Captain Sensible on 'Happy Talk'
Laura F Spira
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2001 11:22:32 +0100, Laura F Spira
> <la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote:
>
> >The converse is also interesting. Our son, who writes professionally,
> >has actually read very little (although he can bluff his way in almost
> >any literary conversation). I have always been puzzled as to where he
> >acquired his vast and diverse vocabulary, as well as his talent.
>
> When I was in Waterstones in Cambridge during my Easter break, I
> noticed a book. I don't remember the exact title of it (something
> like 'How to Bluff in Literary Conversations') but what it was was a
> synopsis of two hundred or so classics along with various other little
> bits and pieces (I think there were points to raise for each book to
> make oneself look clever). I thought it'd be horrible - it'd take a
> lot of the fun out of reading all those books if the conclusion was
> already known to the reader!
>
>
If you need a book to tell you how to bluff, you are not a natural
bluffer and stand no chance. A natural bluffer is full of charm and
ready wit and likes to keep his (oddly, I know of no women who do this)
nearest and dearest on tenterhooks when bluffing in public. My father
was an expert: on one notable occasion at a reception at a livery hall
in the City, full of the great and the good (I can no longer remember
why *we* were there) he switched effortlessly from a conversation about
point-to-point with a famous horsewoman to a discussion of Gobelin
tapestries with an expert thereon, while my mother and I looked on in
amazement, knowing full well that he knew nothing about either subject.
--
Laura
(emulate st. George for email)
wanderer
< snip >
>
> A great many people read in Britain, even if it is only a tabloid.
Hmm, are tabloids meant to be read? I thought they were elaborate
pictograms!
Regards,
--
The Wanderer
Visit that ye be not visited!
Dr Robin Bignall
<la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>>
><snip Phil's interesting discussion >
>>
>> Can't argue with that, Phil, but what was he or she a graduate in?
>> (See my last post on specialisation.) My last formal instruction in
>> English was when I was 17, but:
>> - I have an interest in the use of English
>> - I read several tens of thousands of books since then.
>
>I had never before thought about how many books I might have read in my
>life, but that does sound like an *awful* lot to me.
I've been reading about 10 books a week for over 50 years. Sometimes
more. I need little sleep and can, and mostly do, polish off a couple
a day. I don't ever watch TV, so I have the time.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>"Dr Robin Bignall" wrote
>
>< snip >
>>
>> A great many people read in Britain, even if it is only a tabloid.
>
>Hmm, are tabloids meant to be read? I thought they were elaborate
>pictograms!
>
Well, yes, but...
In fact, I think that one won't find tabloids using particularly
ungrammatical English. (Except for the 'Sun' headlines, of course, and
their puns are now a well-established usage!) It takes skill to
'write-down' without showing the audience that you are doing so.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Phil C.
"Dr Robin Bignall" <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:1iumgtc30gv0l0i9c...@4ax.com...
> >I received a business letter recently from someone whom I
know
> >to be a graduate who used the form "I would not of done
it".
> >Now I would say that for that person in that context that
is
> >simply wrong - unless a person wishes to look foolish.
Would
> >anyone disagree? Whether it is "wrong" in every dialect and
> >patois or for all time I wouldn`t like to say. But for as
long
> >as we are concerned to be "correct" in some way we will
look
> >to authorities of some kind.
> Can't argue with that, Phil, but what was he or she a
graduate in?
> (See my last post on specialisation.) My last formal
instruction in
> English was when I was 17, but:
> - I have an interest in the use of English
> - I read several tens of thousands of books since then.
I`m not sure what subject but she`s got a management position
in a serious organisation which requires her to write many
formal letters. My wife (sorry, "accountant") first read the
letter and thought it was hilarious. She never went to
university but just cannot imagine anyone literate making so
gross an error. I would say it was a generational thing except
that the culprit is of mature years. As far as I`m aware it`s
a pretty rare error for a person in a position of authority.
It was quite a stern letter which made it all the more
hilarious.
I think the answer may lie in the computer age. In my
experience typists often had a better command of the language
than those they typed for - and discreetly corrected such
errors. I assume that these days many people just type their
own letters from scratch.
Laura F Spira
at last night's meeting of the book group I belong to (we're all over
50, some of us by quite a long way) and it was discussed at some length.
One question raised: Do you count the books you re-read? We discovered
that we all had favourite books that we returned to fairly regularly.
{$ne...@goldmark.org
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Phil C. wrote:
> <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010522...@lehel.goldmark.p
> rivate...
>
> > As for usage "authorities". No one has any exclusive rights there, and
> > for the most part they are entirely ignored, except in places like this
> > newsgroup.
>
> I really don`t think that`s true. People are very concerned
> about correctness in language even if they don`t consult
> authorities directly.
People are very quick to notice deviations from what they think is
appropriate.
> We notice the bits of the language that are prone to variable use but
> the huge, agreed central corpus is so instinctive to us that we
> scarcely notice it until we come across a bit that is difficult or
> arguable.
But usage guides don't cover those bits. Consider the following (contains
profanity)
(1) I'm not going to fucking Philadelphia!
(2) I'm not going to Phila-fucking-delphia!
(3) *I'm not going to Philadel-fucking-phia!
Now we know that (1) and (2) are grammatical English, and we know that (3)
simply isn't English. No style guide, no school teacher, no parent
correcting our grammer taught us which ones work in English and which ones
don't.
Most of the "rules" we tacitly know about our language are like that.
They have nothing whatsoever to do with what gets taught in school or
written about in style guides. Style guides, Fowler included, just
discuss a few examples of variations that already exist, and help the
user of the guide learn which varient will make them appear smarter.
> Non-native speakers and the parents of young (and not so young)
> children will be much more aware of the need for correctness because
> they see "mistakes" that others would simply never make.
That's true, but the grammar "authorities" never discuss those sorts of
mistakes.
> On the one hand there is clearly no absolute authority and we enjoy a
> good deal of leeway. On the other hand anyone who doesn`t adopt
> conventional usages (in whatever circles they mix) is looked upon as
> eccentric, illiterate, nerdy or whatever.
That is true, but that is not established by authority either. What
happens to be a status dialect at a time is a social phenomenon outside of
the control of publishers or national language academies for those
countries silly enough to have them.
The fact of the matter is that the actual rules of a real grammar are
remarkably difficult to specify. And the "rules" that English teachers
know about are often absurdly naive.
Now, I happen to have a number of style guides, but that is because I have
done some work for publishers (and there are some good writing manuals).
But for normal people style guides do more harm than good. People will
try to use "big" words that they aren't fully comfortable with, or use
constructions that are sometimes called "hyper-corrections" (eg, "He gave
the book to John and I.") People are better off talking in the forms they
are comfortable with than trying to immitate what they think sounds
correct.
> If nobody adopted
> conventional usage the language would simply cease to be. Language
> only exists collectively.
That's true. But languages existed collectively for communities for many
tens of thousands of years before Fowler.
> The degree to which the language changes tends to be grossly
> exaggerated. We notice neologisms, slang etc. but it tends to be the
> same ephemeral bits of the language that are constantly changing. I
> was reading early C19th newspaper reports recently. Style has changed
> but the basic language is almost identical to modern English.
This is true. People are extremely sensitive to the smallest of changes
(often ephemeral) so that they don't notice the overwhelming cohesiveness.
> Language is actually changing far less than it did in previous
> centuries.
Yes and no. What is seen as large sudden language changes historically
often aren't rapid changes from generation to generation, but one dialect
supplanting another as a status dialect, or dialect of scribes. If though
some political upheavel Geordie were to become the major status dialect of
English in the UK, historians in the future might look back and see what
looked like a sudden change, but Geordie gained its characteristics
slowly. The only rapid change would be its spread. It is possible that
Estuary English (with its unvoiced "th" coming out as "f") is doing that.
Even the in the six years that I lived in western Bedfordshire, I saw a
growth of this. Not because the language has changed rapidly, but because
what was once uncouth became cool.
> I received a business letter recently from someone whom I know
> to be a graduate who used the form "I would not of done it".
> Now I would say that for that person in that context that is
> simply wrong
Yes, but in the final analysis it is actually a spelling mistake and not a
usage mistake. We should consider several froms in English.
(a) The preposition "of"
(b) The model "have"
(c) The clitic (historically derived from (2)) typically written "'ve"
(d) Contracted froms like "should've" which may actually be single words
on their own.
While (2) and (3) are related words, they are distinct froms. Consider
(4) John hasn't gone shopping, but I've gone.
(5) John hasn't gone shopping, but I have gone.
(6) John hasn't gone shopping, but I have.
(7) *John hasn't gone shopping, but I've.
(8) John's gone shopping, but I would not have.
(9) John's gone shopping, but I wouldn not've.
Example (7) just ins't English (and your English teacher didn't tell you
that either) but say the first four aloud and you'll see.
The fact that (9) is OK in the face of (7) (and (7) illustrates a very
robust rule about contractions in English) suggests that what I have
written as "not've" is actually a single word.[1] Now conventional
writing spells what I've written as "not've" as "not have", but
that spelling is much further from corresponding to the way it is
pronounced than "not of", since "of" is rountinely pronounced like
"'ve".
Now it just so happens that (1) when unstressed (as it usually is) is
pronounced exactly the same as (3) when it follows a certain class of
sounds. So what you see is a spelling error. Like getting the apostrophe
wrong in "its". The only thing is that it is a spelling error that is
easier to spot if you recognize the relationship between "have" and "'ve".
Now no usage guide tells you that there are English helper verbs like
"not've". What they can do is warn people away from making embarrasing
spelling errors, but languages have thrived for many tens of thousands of
years before there were usage guides. Sounding smart and educated is
important; usage guides are not.
-j
Notes:
[1] I've left out lots of pieces of that argument. But it gets tricky
subtle and has lots of different side roads. (one of them points out
that the word "aren't" as first person singular can only be used in
question inversion:
(z) We aren't going to the store.
(y) Aren't we going to the store?
(x) Aren't I going to the store?
(w) *I aren't going to the store.
But I've already gone far too far astray to just say that your "should
not of" example was a spelling error and not a grammar error (though a
better understanding of grammar would of made the error clear.[2]
[2] The spelling error in that is deliberate. But I'm sure that there
are lots of other natural ones in this posting.
Phil C.
"Laura F Spira" <la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote in message
news:3B0BCC94...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com...
> If you need a book to tell you how to bluff, you are not a
natural
> bluffer and stand no chance. A natural bluffer is full of
charm and
> ready wit and likes to keep his (oddly, I know of no women
who do this)
> nearest and dearest on tenterhooks when bluffing in public.
My father
> was an expert: on one notable occasion at a reception at a
livery hall
> in the City, full of the great and the good (I can no longer
remember
> why *we* were there) he switched effortlessly from a
conversation about
> point-to-point with a famous horsewoman to a discussion of
Gobelin
> tapestries with an expert thereon, while my mother and I
looked on in
> amazement, knowing full well that he knew nothing about
either subject.
Now I don`t really find that kind of ability particularly
mysterious, perhaps because I recognise a small piece of it in
myself. It seems to be a mixture of intuitive assessment of
the audience and the kind of retentive mind that can pick up
an awful lot of information from very little input. I used to
have to practise it quite a bit because I worked in jobs in
which I had no interest whatever. Creating an aura of
expertise was much easier than actually doing any work. I
avoided it in other circumstances because I don`t really like
that feeling of manipulating people. (I hate practical jokes
for the same reason. I guess I`m an old puritan at heart.) I
noticed my son trying it on me when I was "helping" him with
school work (i.e. doing it for him). Takes one to know one. If
there is an underlying difference between men and women it may
be that men don`t like to be put at a disadvantage. They like
to be the ones who are authoritative. Probably a dim echo of
the rutting season, or something. Hence many flame wars in
NGs. I wonder if your father felt a bit insecure surrounded by
the great and the good and had a need to demonstrate to his
family how easily he could get the better of these people.
I`ve got a nasty feeling I would probably have done the same
and fallen flat on my face.
It is the abilities I lack that seem to me to be miraculous -
playing a musical instrument, repairing a completely
unfamiliar engine, finding one`s way out of a suburban housing
estate at the first attempt, plastering a wall, remembering
how to do things on a computer for longer than ten seconds...
Harvey V
>> while my mother and I looked on in amazement, knowing full well
>> that he knew nothing about either subject.
<snip>
>
> I wonder if your father felt a bit insecure surrounded by the great
> and the good and had a need to demonstrate to his family how easily
> he could get the better of these people.
Maybe her father happened to know a lot more than either she or her
mother gave him credit for!
It happens....... ;)
Harvey
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>
You're absolutely right. It used to be that behind every successful
person there was a highly competent secretary.
In these days of easily-changed standard letters on word processors,
with the possibility of re-using paragraphs which have been set up
properly, few people seem organised enough to set up such a system.
The worst case is standard letters which have been set up by someone
of questionable literacy, and then re-used by others without thought.
I have just been through a house move, with all of the letters to-ing
and fro-ing with all of the organisations involved. Apart from them
ignoring letters or saying that they have not received Recorded
Delivery which has been signed for, or completely ignoring the
contents of a letter and doing something completely different (all
worth a complete newsgroup of their own!) the English of some of the
replies has been atrocious. I wonder that people dare to sign their
names to such stuff. But, it seems, no one cares any longer.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Dr Robin Bignall
<la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote:
Oh, yes. For the same reasons. There are books that are timeless, that
one reads again and again. There are those which cannot be put down at
the time, but which, a week later, one finds hard to recall. Most
'best sellers' are on the latter list!
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Phil C.
rivate...
> On Tue, 22 May 2001, Phil C. wrote:
> > We notice the bits of the language that are prone to
variable use but
> > the huge, agreed central corpus is so instinctive to us
that we
> > scarcely notice it until we come across a bit that is
difficult or
> > arguable.
>
> But usage guides don't cover those bits (snip)
Well I never mentioned Fowler in particular (which I haven`t
read). Books on grammar and other language related issues are
many and various. They are just one of the sources that people
may use to contemplate "correct" language. Most of us are
"corrected" by more direct methods.
> Most of the "rules" we tacitly know about our language are
like that.
> They have nothing whatsoever to do with what gets taught in
school or
> written about in style guides. Style guides, Fowler
included, just
> discuss a few examples of variations that already exist, and
help the
> user of the guide learn which varient will make them appear
smarter.
Parents correct their children`s language. Groups enforce
linguistic conformity. Children are cruel to those who make
"childish" errors. We change our speech to avoid looking
silly. It isn`t just tacit - language is openly enforced in
many places other than the classroom. That you and I easily
understand each other isn`t some massive coincidence. We have
had very similar versions imposed on us.
> People are better off talking in the forms they
> are comfortable with than trying to immitate what they think
sounds
> correct.
That is a worthy ideal, as long as they are understood but in
practice it is an ideal which is often promoted by those
who use high status forms of English and are unlikely to
encounter significant linguistic prejudice. We notice errors
in people`s attempts to sound "correct" but the vast majority
of self-correction (or whatever we want to call it) goes on
pretty seamlessly. There may be better or worse ways of going
about it but that doesn`t affect the principle. Moderating
one`s dialect, for example, is pretty standard practice for
people moving within the UK. We are judged by the language we
use whether we like it or not. I wouldn`t blame those who
change their speech or avoid "mistakes" to improve their life
chances.
> > If nobody adopted
> > conventional usage the language would simply cease to be.
Language
> > only exists collectively.
> That's true. But languages existed collectively for
communities for many
> tens of thousands of years before Fowler.
Yes, but small communities. A continnuum of dialects rather
than a cohesive language on the grand scale. The growth of
artificially big language communities is surely the very
reason that we have become overtly concerned about
"correctness". Concern for correct language certainly goes
back as far as the Ancient Greeks and no doubt much further.
> > Language is actually changing far less than it did in
previous
> > centuries.
>
> Yes and no. What is seen as large sudden language changes
historically
> often aren't rapid changes from generation to generation,
but one dialect
> supplanting another as a status dialect, or dialect of
scribes.
Theoretically possible but it hasn`t happened in English.
"Standard English" developed haphazardly - mainly from East
Mercian but with lots of other influences. The pace of change
has slowed, I suggest, partly because of the ironing out of
choices between dialect forms, partly because of increased
literacy and access to media and partly because the very
concept of "correctness" has grown with the status of the
language. "Correct" language is maintained _because_ it is
seen as "correct". Shakespeare could just invent words. It`s
much harder to do that now.
> > I received a business letter recently from someone whom I
know
> > to be a graduate who used the form "I would not of done
it".
> > Now I would say that for that person in that context that
is
> > simply wrong
> Yes, but in the final analysis it is actually a spelling
mistake and not a
> usage mistake. We should consider several froms in English.
(snipped for brevity)
I realise you put a lot of detail into the analysis but I
really can`t agree with it. "I would not hav done it" has a
spelling mistake. "Of" is a completely different word. What I
think has clearly happened is that the writer has made a
mistaken back-formation from abbreviated informal speech to
the "formally correct" version. "Wouldn`t`ve" has become
"would not of" rather than "would not have". Spelling mistakes
only exist in writing. "Wouldn`t of" is a well known error of
speech. But it makes no difference - a major error of spelling
is much like one of grammar. "Correct" spelling
and "correct" grammar are bedfellows. (Rather savage snippage
for brevity I`m afraid.I hope it`s fair)
wanderer
>
> <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010523...@lehel.goldmark.p
> rivate...
< snipping some very erudite arguments>
The expression contemplating one's navel comes to mind!
Regards
--
The Wanderer
Have I understood what the other guy is saying?
Have I said what I mean? Have I meant what I said?
Arty Smokes
> In fact, I think that one won't find tabloids using particularly
> ungrammatical English. (Except for the 'Sun' headlines, of course, and
> their puns are now a well-established usage!) It takes skill to
> 'write-down' without showing the audience that you are doing so.
I'm afraid I'm an admirer of the headlines in the Sun, though I've never
bought it in my life. I remember reading somewhere that a study of various
newspapers had shown that you needed a "reading age" of 11.4 to understand
every word in a typical issue of the Sun, while the Mirror required the
comprehension skills of an average 12-year-old. I can't, however, confirm
that in response to these findings, the Mirror cut out a few syllables in
order that it could out-dumb its rival, to try and increase sales.
--
Arty Smokes
"There's more to life than books you know, but not much more."
Arty Smokes
> [Note this message contains profanity in some example sentences later
on.]
What does profanity mean? Oh, fucking swearing you mean. ;o)
> On Tue, 22 May 2001, Phil C. wrote:
<SNIP>
> > Language is actually changing far less than it did in previous
> > centuries.
>
> Yes and no. <SNIP>
>.It is possible that
> Estuary English (with its unvoiced "th" coming out as "f") is doing
that.
> Even the in the six years that I lived in western Bedfordshire, I saw a
> growth of this. Not because the language has changed rapidly, but
because
> what was once uncouth became cool.
I think there has been a massive change in language use since Eastenders
first came about. Even supposedly "posh" people speak in Estuary English.
(Especially down here in Southend!)
Another example is offered by the BBC News. For many years, the middle
classes supposedly aspired to the "received pronunciation" of BBC
newsreaders. Now newsreaders are trying to be "down with the kids". First
there was all that nonsense of saying "From John and me" instead of the
old "John and I", but now we have Huw Edwards with his daily payoff line:
"Bye for now!"
I mean, can you imagine a newsreader saying that phrase even 5 years ago?
Soon they'll be making shapes with their fingers like some American
gangsta rappers, and calling us mo-fos! ;o)
What no-one else seems to have mentioned (unless I've missed it) is that
the sheer number of words in use today is far greater than before. Major
dictionaries are having to regularly publish updates as more words
(generally technology-derived) become commonplace. I think FAQ is already
in most recent dictionaries. Maybe even LoL is too...? Since technology's
growth is virtually exponential, the language will get bigger.
> > I received a business letter recently from someone whom I know
> > to be a graduate who used the form "I would not of done it".
> > Now I would say that for that person in that context that is
> > simply wrong
>
> Yes, but in the final analysis it is actually a spelling mistake and not
a
> usage mistake.
<SNIP all the stuff that I *did* read and inwardly digest>
Like Phil C, I don't think it is a spelling mistake. Only a monkey could
misspell <have> or <'ve> as <of>.
Philip Powell
<whhvs@*removethis*operamail.com> writes
Not in this house it doesn't - as my wife and daughter inform me only
too frequently (-:
--
Philip Powell
Looking north across the Derwent Valley and Northumberland
to The Cheviot
Laura F Spira
>
If
> there is an underlying difference between men and women it may
> be that men don`t like to be put at a disadvantage. They like
> to be the ones who are authoritative. Probably a dim echo of
> the rutting season, or something. Hence many flame wars in
> NGs. I wonder if your father felt a bit insecure surrounded by
> the great and the good and had a need to demonstrate to his
> family how easily he could get the better of these people.
> I`ve got a nasty feeling I would probably have done the same
> and fallen flat on my face.
No, insecurity had nothing to do with it: on that occasion I think it
was the buzz he got from the possibility of being challenged and from
knowing he had us on tenterhooks too. I have no idea if he did this when
we weren't around, of course!
>
> It is the abilities I lack that seem to me to be miraculous -
> playing a musical instrument, repairing a completely
> unfamiliar engine, finding one`s way out of a suburban housing
> estate at the first attempt, plastering a wall, remembering
> how to do things on a computer for longer than ten seconds...
Some of these abilities can be acquired. I'm learning to play the piano:
I'm not good at it but I'm fascinated by the process - what happens in
my brain between me looking at the music and hitting the keys?(sometimes
even the right ones!) I'm sure that, if I wanted to, I could learn about
engines and plastering. A sense of direction, however, is something I
lack and doubt whether I could ever acquire (I couldn't tell left from
right until it occurred to me - at the age of 24 - that the letters fall
on the appropriate sides of my name - thank goodness I wasn't named
Rachel..)
Phil C.
> "Phil C." wrote:
> A sense of direction, however, is something I
> lack and doubt whether I could ever acquire (I couldn't tell
left from
> right until it occurred to me - at the age of 24 - that the
letters fall
> on the appropriate sides of my name - thank goodness I
wasn't named
> Rachel..)
I think I must claim the championship. I lived in Oxford for
quite a long time before I could work out that the meaningless
maze of streets was actually organised on a very, very simple
crossroad pattern. Many`s the happy hour I`ve spent driving
round one-way systems or walking round hospitals wondering how
the hell to get out. Finding my way back from the toilet in an
unfamiliar pub has to be planned with military precision so I
don`t find myself in the broom cupboard. I suspect that bit of
my brain may have been knocked out early by unsuspected MS.
All is not lost however as MS may also hold the solution. I
can find my way back by... er... leaving a trail. ;o)
Phil C.
"wanderer" <wand...@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:9ejfri$qok$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Phil C." wrote
> >
> > <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
> >
news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010523...@lehel.goldmark.p
> > rivate...
>
> < snipping some very erudite arguments>
>
> The expression contemplating one's navel comes to mind!
Thereby hangs a tale. My other half still sells music for a
living. She puts various codes by some of the more obscure
jazz so that when customers ask she can remind herself what
the style is. "CN" is for "Contemplates Navel". Only the most
extreme avant-garde stuff earns the accolade "DUOR" which is
"Disappears Up Own Rectum" (to examine navel from the inside).
Mmm.... nice.
wanderer
> Thereby hangs a tale. My other half still sells music for a
> living. She puts various codes by some of the more obscure
> jazz so that when customers ask she can remind herself what
> the style is. "CN" is for "Contemplates Navel". Only the most
> extreme avant-garde stuff earns the accolade "DUOR" which is
> "Disappears Up Own Rectum" (to examine navel from the inside).
> Mmm.... nice.
For those of you interested, the word is Omphaloskepsis!
< g >
Regards
--
The Wanderer
The older I get the better I used to be.
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> Books on grammar and other language related issues are
> many and various. They are just one of the sources that people
> may use to contemplate "correct" language. Most of us are
> "corrected" by more direct methods.
[...]
> Parents correct their children`s language. Groups enforce
> linguistic conformity. Children are cruel to those who make
> "childish" errors. We change our speech to avoid looking
> silly. It isn`t just tacit - language is openly enforced in
> many places other than the classroom.
Exactly. The books and style guides are largely irrelevant for this
enforcement mechanism. It is socially and economically extremely
important how you talk. But the mechanisms have nothing to do with
published authorities.
[Aside: May I ask why you systematically use an open single quote (`)
where you should use an apostrophe (')? I know that in some screen fonts
the two look indistinguishable, but on lots of others, it is actually a
bit annoying seeing the thing slant the wrong way.]
> > People are better off talking in the forms they
> > are comfortable with than trying to immitate what they think sounds
> > correct.
>
> That is a worthy ideal, as long as they are understood but in
> practice it is an ideal which is often promoted by those
> who use high status forms of English and are unlikely to
> encounter significant linguistic prejudice.
You snipped a little bit too much. I was saying that the damage from
hyper-correction or clearly using words beyond your "comfortable"
vocabulary, does more harm than your native dialect.
I agree that linguistic prejudice is an automatic and extremely powerful
response. The best defense against it is to sound educated, and the best
way to sound educated is to be educated. I also think that the original
goals of the Fowler are admirable. He wanted to help people who were
suffering the consequences of linguistic prejudice, by providing a concise
guide to educated sounding speech and writing. But in later editions and
later usage it became to some an "authority".
> We notice errors in people`s attempts to sound "correct" but the vast
> majority of self-correction (or whatever we want to call it) goes on
> pretty seamlessly.
I guess it is a matter of taste. Hearing someone trying to speak formally
and getting it wrong actually makes me feel a sort of empathetic
embarrassment. Like when people use "whom" where they should use "who".
(Listen for it; it happens a lot.)
> There may be better or worse ways of going
> about it but that doesn`t affect the principle. Moderating
> one`s dialect, for example, is pretty standard practice for
> people moving within the UK.
Everyone does that all the time. What is scary is that many people in
California claim I have an English accent. I find that remarkable and
certainly disturbing, since an English accent from an American is usually
seen as an affectation. (I only lived in the UK for 6 years!). And I
certainly remember the taunting I received when I moved from New Jersey to
California at the age of 15.
Most people know that they vary their dialect based on context, but they
don't realize the extent to which they do it.
> We are judged by the language we use whether we like it or not. I
> wouldn`t blame those who change their speech or avoid "mistakes" to
> improve their life chances.
I have no problem with that. I just don't think that style guides have
a useful role in that.
> > > If nobody adopted
> > > conventional usage the language would simply cease to be.
> Language
> > > only exists collectively.
>
> > That's true. But languages existed collectively for
> communities for many
> > tens of thousands of years before Fowler.
>
> Yes, but small communities. A continnuum of dialects rather
> than a cohesive language on the grand scale. The growth of
> artificially big language communities is surely the very
> reason that we have become overtly concerned about
> "correctness". Concern for correct language certainly goes
> back as far as the Ancient Greeks and no doubt much further.
>
> > > Language is actually changing far less than it did in
> previous
> > > centuries.
> >
> > Yes and no.
> > What is seen as large sudden language changes historically
> > often aren't rapid changes from generation to generation, but one dialect
> > supplanting another as a status dialect, or dialect of scribes.
>
> Theoretically possible but it hasn`t happened in English.
I think that most commonly accepted view about "the great vowel shift" in
English is exactly attributed to such a shift as a power base from one
region of the country came to dominate national policy.
Over the past decades a lot of research has gone into this approach to
understanding periods of seemingly rapid change in English (and other
languages). It seems to hold up. I am certainly not a historical
linguist (though I dated one for quiet some time, who did focus on the
history of English, though looked at changes in grammatical structure.)
> The pace of change has slowed, I suggest, partly because of the
> ironing out of choices between dialect forms, partly because of
> increased literacy and access to media
I agree.
> and partly because the very concept of "correctness" has grown with
> the status of the language.
I don't think so. Notions of correctness have always been there.
And the two competing social forces that drive language change have always
been there: (1) The desire to talk like the higher status people; (2) The
desire to mark your clique's distinctness. People have done extremely
detatailed work of even how language (and not just use of various slang
terms) changes within a high-school, following the dynamics of the social
networks over the course of four years.
> I realise you put a lot of detail into the analysis but I
> really can`t agree with it. "I would not hav done it" has a
> spelling mistake. "Of" is a completely different word.
I failed to make myself clear. I am claiming that there is a single word
of English which I am calling
not've
That word is correctly spelled "not have", and it is incorrectly spelled
"not of".
I am not saying that someone misspelled "have" as "of", but that they
misspelled "not have" as "not of".
The weird bits in my argument were to suggest that "not have" really is a
word on its own, which can be misspelled on its own.
> What I think has clearly happened is that the writer has made a
> mistaken back-formation from abbreviated informal speech to the
> "formally correct" version.
Hmmm. You may be right about that. If that is the case, then this is an
instance of a sort of hyper-correction. but one that is forced by the
writing system, since "not've" is not an option.
Also when someone spells "are" as "our" or "edition" as "addition" or
"too" as "to" (I make all of those mistakes), it really is a spelling
error. I think that "not have" to "not of" is another instance of that.
Note that no one who makes the mistake writes
(1) I of eaten the cake.
It only occurs when the "'ve" would be attached to a "helper verb" or
"not".
We don't disagree on the importance of speaking and writing appropriately,
but we do disagree on the role to style manuals in that. I think that
they are mostly a nuisance.
-j
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> < snipping some very erudite arguments>
>
> The expression contemplating one's navel comes to mind!
Isn't that what this group is for? I couldn't fine alt.navel-gazing
on my news server.
-j
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010523...@lehel.goldmark.private...
> > [Note this message contains profanity in some example sentences later
> on.]
>
> What does profanity mean? Oh, fucking swearing you mean. ;o)
Exactly. But without taking an oath.
> Like Phil C, I don't think it is a spelling mistake. Only a monkey could
> misspell <have> or <'ve> as <of>.
But that is not the spelling error I was saying they were making.
Instead, I was saying that we have a word in English which I will write
not've
which is correctly spelled "not have", but is often misspelled "not of".
PS: I often misspell "are" as "our" and other cases where I routinely
write unrelated words that sound similar. ("addition" where I mean
"edition" is one that I actually wrote (and then corrected) in my previous
message.
-j
Phil C.
"Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ejqk8$l12$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I think there has been a massive change in language use
since Eastenders
> first came about. Even supposedly "posh" people speak in
Estuary English.
> (Especially down here in Southend!)
Surely you mean Sahfend. The dialect of Sahfend once got me
into trouble. You may be familiar with the Elms public house
in Leigh. In the Estuarine dialect one would say "I`m going
down the Elms" This would be pronounced "danny Elms". Danny
Elms took on a life of his own. He became something of
a cult figure among my work mates. If I had left it there and
not used him in concocted records all might have been well.
Somebody in authority wanted to know who this Danny Elms was
and my plot to avoid ever having to do any work began to
unravel. <sigh>
I think, BTW, that the geographical spread of Estuary English
has more to do with the actual physical movement of those from
its heartland to other parts of the country than the influence
of TV. (Years of Coronation St. didn`t seem to have any
effect.) Vast numbers of London "overspill" were moved out to
country towns and wholly new conurbations in the post war era.
In more recent years the price of a semi in London would buy a
mansion in my part of the world. Nearby Rutland was _the_
house price hotspot last year because of the flood up from the
capital. I imagine that all this happened to Southend much
earlier. I guess its native dialect would have been similar to
the East Anglian of north Essex. I suspect the upward social
spread has been a natural consequence of a more egalitarian
outlook. The flood defences which used to prevent it have not
been maintained. As a child I would have been in trouble in my
lower middle class family for talking "common". Now there is
greater tolerance.
Arty Smokes
> PS: I often misspell "are" as "our" and other cases where I routinely
> write unrelated words that sound similar.
I still don't see how that is a spelling mistake rather than incorrect
word usage. A spelling mistake surely occurs where the writer has missing,
extra or jumbled letters. If you mean to write the word "our", then you'd
have to be pretty stupid to spell it "are". Spelling it "uor" I would call
a spelling error, since it is obvious what the meaning is from the context
in which it is used. Using other words entirely means either the sentence
makes no sense, or even changes the meaning. Consider for example:
"I accepted his apologies...... "
This makes perfect sense, but look at:
"I excepted his apologies..."
The latter has almost the opposite meaning. It's not a *spelling* error,
since the word chosen is spelt correctly. It's just the wrong *word*. ;o)
Harvey V
<snip>
>
> I think, BTW, that the geographical spread of Estuary English
> has more to do with the actual physical movement of those from
> its heartland to other parts of the country than the influence
> of TV. (Years of Coronation St. didn`t seem to have any
> effect.)
I think you've done a proverbial nail-and-head thing there.
There's a fellow I know here in Basingstoke -- a classic "designated
overspill" town (which is why it's the punchline to a lot of jokes) who
loves the place and defends it no end.
He moved here when it was first designated (c.1970); was born in the
East End and married into an east-London Jewish family; and was
*definitely* one of those who brought East London pronunciation into
Hampshire.
There's another fellow in the same local pub-friends circle who moved
here one or two years later from Lancashire (Fleetwood, if we're being
precise, which oddly enough is where my mother was born), but I don't
hear a lot of Lancastrian influence in the local speech.
The physical spread of people seems to me a much more likely
explanation for accent change than does exposure to media.
Perhaps it's a case of media people flattering themselves as to their
influence.
Harvey
(Cross-posted this to alt.usage.english; hope that's OK)
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.33.010524...@lehel.goldmark.private...
> > PS: I often misspell "are" as "our" and other cases where I routinely
> > write unrelated words that sound similar.
>
> I still don't see how that is a spelling mistake rather than incorrect
> word usage.
Someone who makes that mistake (me, for example) does not use pronouns
where verbs are expected or the other way 'round.
> A spelling mistake surely occurs where the writer has missing,
> extra or jumbled letters. If you mean to write the word "our", then you'd
> have to be pretty stupid to spell it "are".
OK. Fine. But then there are three kinds of errors.
(1) A spelling mistake by your definition (getting letters jumbled).
(2) A word usage error (eg, using "compose" where "comprise" is the
appropriate word).
(3) Writing the wrong (similar sounding) word.
When I write "addition" instead of "edition", it is not a case of (2),
nor "two" for "to". There is no possibility of actually confusing those
words EXCEPT IN WRITING. It's not like compose/comprise at all where
people really do get mixed up about what the particular words mean.
Now whether you want to call (3) a spelling error or not is really a
matter of definition. But it simply isn't a usage error like (2).
> Consider for example:
> "I accepted his apologies...... "
> This makes perfect sense, but look at:
> "I excepted his apologies..."
> The latter has almost the opposite meaning. It's not a *spelling* error,
> since the word chosen is spelt correctly. It's just the wrong *word*. ;o)
So yes. What (2) and (3) share is that they both can be seen as writing
the wrong word correctly. But I still think that there is a more
fundamental difference between not knowing how a word is to be used and
writing the wrong one.
A word exists in the brain as an abstractions. It is associated with
o a phonological representation.
o a meaning
o a spelling
o a grammatical catagory (with lots of subcategory information, and
this includes a morphological category.)
o ... [and lots of other things] ...
Now when someone writes "comprise" where they should write "compose" they
have the meanings mixed up. But when someone writes "our" where they
should write "are" they are using the "right" word in terms of meaning
and grammatical catagory., but have grabed the spelling from the wrong
one. I mean, they aren't even close to being the same grammatical
catagory, so it is simply not plausible that they have been confused like
comprise/compose.
So, if it is not a "spelling error" in some narrow sense, it is still
exclusively a writing error.
Laura F Spira
>
> "Laura F Spira" <la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote in message
> news:3B0DF9D6...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com...
> > "Phil C." wrote:
>
> > A sense of direction, however, is something I
> > lack and doubt whether I could ever acquire (I couldn't tell
> left from
> > right until it occurred to me - at the age of 24 - that the
> letters fall
> > on the appropriate sides of my name - thank goodness I
> wasn't named
> > Rachel..)
>
> I think I must claim the championship.
There's a challenge I can't ignore! When I was due to change schools at
age 11, my parents embarked on an elaborate campaign which lasted
throughout the summer to teach me to negotiate the daily bus and Tube
journey. My mother then discovered that a sixth former at my new school
lived very near us so I was entrusted to her care. I travelled happily
with her each day and somehow managed to learn how to get home alone as
we usually left school at different times. However, inevitably the
morning came when Ann was off sick. I did get to school in time for
lunch...
I lived in Oxford for
> quite a long time before I could work out that the meaningless
> maze of streets was actually organised on a very, very simple
> crossroad pattern.
I've lived in Oxford for the last 30 years and can still get lost: tell
me the secret!
Many`s the happy hour I`ve spent driving
> round one-way systems or walking round hospitals wondering how
> the hell to get out.
I ran out of petrol trying to escape from Leicester once. When our son
was about 3 he was asleep (I thought) in the back of the car as we drove
off to visit a friend (who we had visited several times before). We
arrived rather later than expected and my fabricated excuse was blown
out of the water when Jon asked: 'Why did we go round the big roundabout
all those times, Mummy?' Jon has inherited this handicap and, thank
goodness, the family stories now centre on his incapacity rather than
mine. He has lived in Edinburgh for the last 6 years and still carries a
street map with him everywhere.
Finding my way back from the toilet in an
> unfamiliar pub has to be planned with military precision so I
> don`t find myself in the broom cupboard.
I frequently find myself in restaurant kitchens where people try to
direct me to the ladies and don't understand that I actually need
directions back to my seat!
I suspect that bit of
> my brain may have been knocked out early by unsuspected MS.
> All is not lost however as MS may also hold the solution. I
> can find my way back by... er... leaving a trail. ;o)
<g>
My problem is clearly genetic but I have reached the age when people are
not surprised by this inadequacy and treat me with some tolerance.
Philip Powell
<nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
>
>"Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:9ejqk8$l12$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>> I think there has been a massive change in language use
>since Eastenders
>> first came about. Even supposedly "posh" people speak in
>Estuary English.
>> (Especially down here in Southend!)
>
>Surely you mean Sahfend.
No. Arty is from Southend - he would say Sathend[0]
>The dialect of Sahfend once got me
>into trouble. You may be familiar with the Elms public house
>in Leigh. In the Estuarine dialect one would say "I`m going
>down the Elms" This would be pronounced "danny Elms". Danny
>Elms took on a life of his own. He became something of
>a cult figure among my work mates. If I had left it there and
>not used him in concocted records all might have been well.
>Somebody in authority wanted to know who this Danny Elms was
>and my plot to avoid ever having to do any work began to
>unravel. <sigh>
I recall going there at least once - was it on Elm Drive?
0: Unless, of course, he comes from Thorpe Bay - in which case he would
pronounce "Southend" as "Thorpe Bay" (-: [1]
1: Or maybe things have changed since I lived there.
wanderer
< snip >
>
> I lived in Oxford for
> > quite a long time before I could work out that the meaningless
> > maze of streets was actually organised on a very, very simple
> > crossroad pattern.
>
> I've lived in Oxford for the last 30 years and can still get lost: tell
> me the secret!
>
I moved from Oxford some 40 years ago. The only thing I really miss about it
is the river. Why is it that the Thames becomes the Isis for a distance of
about 2 Miles and then reverts back to being the Thames again? Do people
still swim from Iffley Lock to Folly Bridge? Do people still walk along the
river from Osney to Godstow? Sadly I fear not! Does the Cherwell still flood
the water Meadows under Magdalen Bridge? I know Salter's Navy is still
going strong.
I wonder how many locals these days know where Mesopotamia is, or Dames
Delight, or Parson's Pleasure? Long Bridges, Tumbling Bay, Wolvercote, they
all had their bathing places, now long-since closed with today's worries
over health and safety. Who could ever forget the dubious delights of
walking in the thick layer of mud always to be found on the bottom at Long
Bridges?
On a hot summer's day, it would be an outing to Hinksey Lakes - the old
water treatment works, converted to a recreational centre - I think they are
still there. It was always followed with a walk across the footbridge over
the marshalling yards, then onto South Hinksey along the southern by pass -
certainly not something I'd want to do nowadays!
The activities of some of the undergrads on Bonfire nights made the city
centre a no-go area, particularly in the vicinity of the Randolph Hotel.
There's one apocryphal tale about how changing one road sign directed
traffic into an endless loop around the town centre.
I know some things are better left as fond memories, revisiting the town a
few years ago, and showing some friends around, we decided to have lunch at
The Turf Tavern. Oh dear! Not as I remember it at all, even if the fun was
trying to tell visitors that they had to enter Queen Anne's Passage to get
there. I remember the Poor Student cafe in St. Michaels Street, where one
could get a burger and chips for just a few coppers, Cyril Wain's Tea Bar on
the south side of the station car park, where an enormous mug of tea was
just 2 old pence, or Polack Joe's cafe in Jericho. Then there were the old
community restaurants, one at Gloucester Green, another just off the plain,
and I seem to think there were one or two others as well.
I wonder how many might remember queuing up outside Oliver and Gurden's cake
factory somewhere just off the Banbury Road, the precise location escapes me
now. In the years just after the last war, the luxury was one of their
Russian cakes, all moist and pudding-like, with raspberry jam dribbled
through, and a thick layer of chocolate over the top, when such things were
otherwise completely unknown!
Do people still say 'going into town' in Oxford? After quite a few
peregrinations, we have finally settled not far from Norwich. When we talked
about 'going into town', we were very firmly told that one 'goes into the
city', never into town!
Then there were the two or three dance studios! Oh what sins does Bretts
have to answer for? On the top floor over the side entrance to Boswells, it
was a favoured meeting place for youngsters in my day!
Ah, enough of this, back to tiling the bathroom walls!
Regards,
Phil C.
"Laura F Spira" <la...@spira.u-net.com> wrote in message
news:3B0F428C...@spira.u-net.com...
> "Phil C." wrote:
> >
> > "Laura F Spira" <la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote in
message
> > news:3B0DF9D6...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com...
> > > "Phil C." wrote:
> >
> > > A sense of direction, however, is something I
> > > lack and doubt whether I could ever acquire (I couldn't
tell
> > left from
> > > right until it occurred to me - at the age of 24 - that
the
> > letters fall
> > > on the appropriate sides of my name - thank goodness I
> > wasn't named
> > > Rachel..)
> >
> > I think I must claim the championship.
>
Championship challenge snipped for brevity.)
Among my greatest triumphs I remember having to be stopped
from inadvertently walking into the mortuary at a hospital I
"knew well", having to be let out of an obscure back entrance
of the grounds of a stately home, well past closing time and
doing two complete circuits of the huge Peterborough ring road
on my way to see a consultant. (Ah, Peterborough. Glamour
capital of the western world.) I also remember wandering the
back corridors of a massive old psychiatric hospital, where I
had gone to visit someone, desperately hoping I wouldn`t be
challenged. I mean, who`d have believed me? Do you think we
could have our disability officially recognised and claim
benefits for it?
Phil C.
rivate...
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Phil C. wrote:
>
> > Books on grammar and other language related issues are
> > many and various. They are just one of the sources that
people
> > may use to contemplate "correct" language. Most of us are
> > "corrected" by more direct methods.
> Exactly. The books and style guides are largely irrelevant
for this
> enforcement mechanism. It is socially and economically
extremely
> important how you talk. But the mechanisms have nothing to
do with
> published authorities.
I`m really not sure what you`re arguing against here. No-one
in the thread (unless I missed it) has argued for grammars etc
to be used in this way. I wonder if it`s a cultural thing. Are
self-help grammars etc marketed in the USA on a "this book
could change your life" basis? Here we just use them (if at
all) as reference books and certainly don`t give them undue
respect. They are seen as "authorities" for occasionally
checking things in much the same way as dictionaries.
> [Aside: May I ask why you systematically use an open single
quote (`)
> where you should use an apostrophe (')? I know that in some
screen fonts
> the two look indistinguishable, but on lots of others, it is
actually a
> bit annoying seeing the thing slant the wrong way.]
[Aside: It`s a badge of incompetence, proudly worn. Don`t
worry. Be happy.]
> > > What is seen as large sudden language changes
historically
> > > often aren't rapid changes from generation to
generation, but one dialect
> > > supplanting another as a status dialect, or dialect of
scribes.
> >
> > Theoretically possible but it hasn`t happened in English.
>
> I think that most commonly accepted view about "the great
vowel shift" in
> English is exactly attributed to such a shift as a power
base from one
> region of the country came to dominate national policy.
Eh? Tell me more. The Great Vowel Shift (a) was a very slow
process taking centuries to complete (b) had no effect on the
London/E.Mids dialect inevitably being that of prestige and
literature (c) happened across the various dialects of English
and (d) was restricted to vowel changes rather than the much
more substantial changes implied by a dialect being
supplanted. Much remains mysterious but I think it would be
hard to tease a rapid supplanting of dialect out of that. The
powerful dialect was evidently the _slowest_ to change IIRC.
(The Great Bowel Shift, however, was an altogether more sudden
and noxious event.)
> > The pace of change has slowed, I suggest, partly...
> > ...because the very concept of "correctness" has grown
with
> > the status of the language.
>
> I don't think so. Notions of correctness have always been
there.
> And the two competing social forces that drive language
change have always
> been there: (1) The desire to talk like the higher status
people (snip)
English had low status for centuries during which French was
the language of Court and Latin the language of scholarship.
The peasants may have cared about correctness but had no power
to codify or enforce it beyond the village level.
"Correctness" on the scale of a major language requires a
powerful elite who care about it - or (more likely) care about
using language to distinguish themselves from the riffraff
Without that, higher status people are likely to talk much
like lower status people. I believe concern for correctness
grew sharply after the Wars of the Roses when the ranks of the
aristocracy had been severely pruned and there was scope for
promotion among the middle classes.
> Also when someone spells "are" as "our" or "edition" as
"addition" or
> "too" as "to" (I make all of those mistakes), it really is
a spelling
> error. I think that "not have" to "not of" is another
instance of that.
It depends what you say and how you think. If you were to say
"our" instead of "are" or really weren`t aware of the
difference then it would be more than a spelling mistake. We
all say "not`ve" but "not of" (spoken or written) suggests a
lack of understanding of the "logic" of how tenses are formed
in English.
Peter P
organ stops. My paternal family originated from Andover, next door to
Basingstoke. When I was in Yorkshire during World War Two everyone assumed
that I was a Londoner whereas today they just accuse me of ".talking
posh"and they adjust their dialect when in conversation with such as myself
as distinct from betweem themselves (when I have difficulty at times to
understand because of some strange expressions). My childhood formative
years between the wars were spent in Malta where all the British service
family kids attended the same school and those of us still in touch comment
that we tend to speak with similar lack of regional accent though possibly
with a touch of Hampshire due to Portsmouth and the large navy of those
days. My wife is west Yorkshire with an accent that is noticeably different
to that of south Yorkshire-but then Yorkshire is a large area. My Wiltshire
born, Linconshire educated son who has lived in the New York area for some
twenty years remains obviously a Britisher but I have observed how his
speech has slowed a little just as I find that Americans have difficulty
understanding me if I speak at my normal pace. I have never had difficulty
understanding any American though some English accents such as Geordie
(Durham) are very difficult for me to follow -and as for Glasgow!
I agree with the views expressed below.
Peter P
"Harvey V" <whhvs@*removethis*operamail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90ACF41385332...@194.168.222.9...
Laura F Spira
Excellent idea, what shall we call it? Illocationism? Misdirectional
syndrome?
Rowan Dingle
>On 25 May 2001, I take it that "Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> said:
>
><snip>
>>
>> I think, BTW, that the geographical spread of Estuary English
>> has more to do with the actual physical movement of those from
>> its heartland to other parts of the country than the influence
>> of TV. (Years of Coronation St. didn`t seem to have any
>> effect.)
>
>I think you've done a proverbial nail-and-head thing there.
[...]
I disagree.
I went to a family gathering a few months ago in rural Southeast
England. Amongst those relations who still lived in the area, the
younger ones spoke with an Estuary accent, the older ones with a rural
burr.
--
Rowan Dingle
Roger Whitehead
> I live in South Yorkshire where my broad southern vowels stand out like
An interesting peregrination. Peter. I come from Portsmouth, of parents
from, respectively, Grimsby and Norfolk (and you think you're in a
mess!). The accent there was sharper than the country Hampshire accent
and foreigners (i.e. anyone not from the island) sometimes compared it to
Cockney, to our indignant displeasure.
> some English accents such as Geordie
> (Durham) are very difficult for me to follow
Don't Geordies come from Tyneside, especially Newcass'l?
Regards,
Roger
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Roger Whitehead,
Oxted, Surrey, England
Roger Whitehead
> I went to a family gathering a few months ago in rural Southeast
> England. Amongst those relations who still lived in the area, the
> younger ones spoke with an Estuary accent, the older ones with a rural
> burr.
Whatever the cause, it's damned ugly and I'll be glad when it falls out
of fashion again.
The BBC's coverage of Chelsea Flower Show this week had an item from
some specimen who managed to combine Estuarine English (complete with
glo'al stop), a lisp and Woy Jenkins' way with "r". I suppose he's still
perfecting the Bennite "sh" for 's'; to be unveiled next year.
Phil C.
> Excellent idea, what shall we call it? Illocationism?
Misdirectional
> syndrome?
We could have a pressure group and write letters to MPs! We
could go on marches! Hmmm... on second thoughts perhaps we`d
better skip the marches. Who knows where we`d end up.
Phil C.
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote
in message news:bW1YjIGs...@blencathra.org.uk...
> In message <9emihh$qmi$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Phil C.
> <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
> >
> >"Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:9ejqk8$l12$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> >> I think there has been a massive change in language use
> >since Eastenders
> >> first came about. Even supposedly "posh" people speak in
> >Estuary English.
> >> (Especially down here in Southend!)
> >
> >Surely you mean Sahfend.
>
> No. Arty is from Southend - he would say Sathend[0]
My parents would have said Southend when using Telephone
Voice. We also used to eat liquorice and chocolate rather than
lickrish and chocklit Eventually we had a garadge as distinct
from a garidge. Anything to distinguish us from the common
folk who said Sahfend but had newer cars than us.
> 0: Unless, of course, he comes from Thorpe Bay - in which
case he would
> pronounce "Southend" as "Thorpe Bay" (-: [1]
In the post-Diana period, has anyone tried to start
pronouncing it Trop Bay?
Arty Smokes
"Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9emihh$qmi$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:9ejqk8$l12$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> > I think there has been a massive change in language use
> since Eastenders
> > first came about. Even supposedly "posh" people speak in
> Estuary English.
> > (Especially down here in Southend!)
>
> Surely you mean Sahfend. The dialect of Sahfend once got me
> into trouble.
Here in Leigh (the posh end of Southend), many people try and pretend
we're not part of the conurbation at all. I've heard some people say "I'm
going into town", when they mean to the row of shops on Leigh Broadway.
There is no gap between the two areas; indeed there are 8 railway stations
with SS postcodes.
My own accent probably varies slightly depending on whereabouts in town I
am, but I'm definitely infected with glottal stop syndrome if I'm feeling
lazy. Having said this, when I lived in Sheffield, many people reckoned I
was really posh!
>You may be familiar with the Elms public house
> in Leigh.
>In the Estuarine dialect one would say "I`m going
> down the Elms" This would be pronounced "danny Elms".
This is quite spooky. Guess where I've just been? Danny Elms! No, really!
;o)
> I think, BTW, that the geographical spread of Estuary English
> has more to do with the actual physical movement of those from
> its heartland to other parts of the country than the influence
> of TV.
You are dead right, of course. My mouth was cashing cheques that my arse
couldn't cover..... ;o)
Think I'll go down the beach instead of arguing with anyone today.
--
Cheers, Arty Smokes.
http://www.smokindesign.co.uk
Fast, Functional, Flash.
Arty Smokes
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:bW1YjIGs...@blencathra.org.uk...
> No. Arty is from Southend - he would say Sathend
> Unless, of course, he comes from Thorpe Bay - in which case he would
> pronounce "Southend" as "Thorpe Bay" (-:
I actually have a Leigh-on-sea postcode, but no-one I've ever spoken to on
Usenet (until today) has ever heard of it. The building across the road
has a Westcliff postcode. Oddly, the nearest railway station to me is
Chalkwell, yet there isn't a postcode for Chalkwell. Confusing, huh?
Thorpe Bay is still alive and well. Well, not *very* alive. Or "well" for
that matter! But it's better than Shoeburyness. ;o)
> I recall going there [The Elms] at least once - was it on Elm Drive?
Indeed. On the corner of London Road. One of my regular haunts.
--
Arty Smokes
Currently listening to.....
Ladytron "604"
Philip Powell
<r...@office-futures.com> writes
>In article <UDLP6.15039$PQ5.1...@news1.cableinet.net>, Peter P wrote:
>> I live in South Yorkshire where my broad southern vowels stand out like
>> organ stops [snip]
>
>An interesting peregrination. Peter. I come from Portsmouth, of parents
>from, respectively, Grimsby and Norfolk (and you think you're in a
>mess!). The accent there was sharper than the country Hampshire accent
>and foreigners (i.e. anyone not from the island) sometimes compared it to
>Cockney, to our indignant displeasure.
>
>> some English accents such as Geordie
>> (Durham) are very difficult for me to follow
>
>Don't Geordies come from Tyneside, especially Newcass'l?
Whyaye man - theor's soom 'as sez yer anly a jardie if ye cooms froom
the toon.
Laura F Spira
>
> "Laura F Spira" <la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote in message
> news:3B0F8A05...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com...
>
> > Excellent idea, what shall we call it? Illocationism?
> Misdirectional
> > syndrome?
>
> We could have a pressure group and write letters to MPs! We
> could go on marches! Hmmm... on second thoughts perhaps we`d
> better skip the marches. Who knows where we`d end up.
>
the right direction. Actually I've always thought most of my
difficulties in life could be solved by a manservant-cum-chauffeur. I'm
off out this afternoon: if anyone spots a green Renault going round the
Oxford ring road for the umpteenth time, that's me.
Philip Powell
<ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
>
>"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
>news:bW1YjIGs...@blencathra.org.uk...
>> In message <9emihh$qmi$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Phil C.
>> <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
>
>> No. Arty is from Southend - he would say Sathend
>> Unless, of course, he comes from Thorpe Bay - in which case he would
>> pronounce "Southend" as "Thorpe Bay" (-:
>
>I actually have a Leigh-on-sea postcode, but no-one I've ever spoken to on
>Usenet (until today) has ever heard of it.
My oldest friend lives in Leigh - and not that far from Chalkwell Park.
>The building across the road has a Westcliff postcode. Oddly, the
>nearest railway station to me is Chalkwell, yet there isn't a postcode
>for Chalkwell. Confusing, huh?
Not to me - lived about 1/4 mile from Chalkwell Station when I was about
6 but can't recall the name of the road [although Baxter Avenue rings a
bell].
>Thorpe Bay is still alive and well. Well, not *very* alive. Or "well" for
>that matter! But it's better than Shoeburyness. ;o)
>
>> I recall going there [The Elms] at least once - was it on Elm Drive?
>
>Indeed. On the corner of London Road. One of my regular haunts.
I think I've just about worked it out now - but it was way back in the
late '60s when I was there.
Laura F Spira
>
> "Laura F Spira" wrote
>
> < snip >
> >
> > I lived in Oxford for
> > > quite a long time before I could work out that the meaningless
> > > maze of streets was actually organised on a very, very simple
> > > crossroad pattern.
> >
> > I've lived in Oxford for the last 30 years and can still get lost: tell
> > me the secret!
> >
>
> I moved from Oxford some 40 years ago. The only thing I really miss about it
> is the river. Why is it that the Thames becomes the Isis for a distance of
> about 2 Miles and then reverts back to being the Thames again? Do people
> still swim from Iffley Lock to Folly Bridge? Do people still walk along the
> river from Osney to Godstow? Sadly I fear not! Does the Cherwell still flood
> the water Meadows under Magdalen Bridge? I know Salter's Navy is still
> going strong.
>
> I wonder how many locals these days know where Mesopotamia is, or Dames
> Delight, or Parson's Pleasure? Long Bridges, Tumbling Bay, Wolvercote, they
> all had their bathing places, now long-since closed with today's worries
> over health and safety. Who could ever forget the dubious delights of
> walking in the thick layer of mud always to be found on the bottom at Long
> Bridges?
<snips remainder as tears of nostalgia swamp keyboard>
All I can say to this wonderful evocation is that, sadly, it's not like
that any more!
Things you left out: the splendid grocers, Grimbly Hughes; the Cadena
cafe and Fuller's, with the wonderful walnut cake; dancing at the Forum
and the Carfax Assembly Rooms....
{$ne...@goldmark.org
> I`m really not sure what you`re arguing against here. No-one
> in the thread (unless I missed it) has argued for grammars etc
> to be used in this way.
Somewhere near the beginning of the thread someone make some comment about
everyone having their favorite dictionary as some authority, but that for
grammars it hasn't happened that way.
I commented that uages guides typically do more harm than good. That's
all. I can't really remember how things started either.
> > I think that most commonly accepted view about "the great vowel shift" in
> > English is exactly attributed to such a shift as a power base from one
> > region of the country came to dominate national policy.
>
> Eh? Tell me more. The Great Vowel Shift (a) was a very slow
> process taking centuries to complete
Yikes! I really goofed here. Yes you are right. The Great Vowal Shift
was an extended process. I picked exactly the WRONG example to make my
case it seems.
I have to stop posting from vague recollections. I do think that there
was something sensible behind my claim and that I wasn't merely talking
out of my back oriface, but at the moment that's the shoe that fits and
I'll have to wear it.
> > And the two competing social forces that drive language change have always
> > been there: (1) The desire to talk like the higher status people (snip)
> English had low status for centuries during which French was
> the language of Court and Latin the language of scholarship.
> The peasants may have cared about correctness but had no power
> to codify or enforce it beyond the village level.
Even within the English speaking community at that time, there would have
been social variation. For this to go on, "codification" is not relevant.
> "Correctness" on the scale of a major language requires a
> powerful elite who care about it - or (more likely) care about
> using language to distinguish themselves from the riffraff
That is true, but such an elite who wish to distinguish themselves from
those below them always exists, whether it be a hierarchy within a
village, or one region against another.
> Without that, higher status people are likely to talk much
> like lower status people. I believe concern for correctness
> grew sharply after the Wars of the Roses when the ranks of the
> aristocracy had been severely pruned and there was scope for
> promotion among the middle classes.
Interesting idea. But it could be that the rise of literarcy merely left
more evidence of such concern.
> It depends what you say and how you think. If you were to say
> "our" instead of "are" or really weren`t aware of the
> difference then it would be more than a spelling mistake.
Yes. But presumably you don't think that I (or anyone) could make that
mistake. These are so entirely different words, that the only plausible
explanation is that I have their spellings mixed up.
> We all say "not`ve" but "not of" (spoken or written) suggests a lack
> of understanding of the "logic" of how tenses are formed in English.
Let me back-peddle a little bit on this one too. The error is getting the
spelling wrong, but a failure to recognize the error after it has been
made would likely involve a failure to understand how tenses are made.
That is, someone could write "not of" as a spelling mistake, but if they
thought that "not of" was the correct way to write that, then they are
certainly confused about grammar.
Donna Richoux
> I went to a family gathering a few months ago in rural Southeast
> England. Amongst those relations who still lived in the area, the
> younger ones spoke with an Estuary accent, the older ones with a rural
> burr.
I asked this a few years ago and got mixed answers. Perhaps our current
crop of British participants can be clearer. When you describe someone
as having a "burr," what do you mean, exactly? Is it the same as being
rhotic (pronouncing their R's, the Americans would say)? Or something
else?
--
Thanks --- Donna Richoux
Arty Smokes
> My oldest friend lives in Leigh - and not that far from Chalkwell Park.
He must be very close to me then, because Chalkwell Park is in Westcliff!
;o)
> Not to me - lived about 1/4 mile from Chalkwell Station when I was about
> 6 but can't recall the name of the road [although Baxter Avenue rings a
> bell].
The only Baxter Avenue in this area is in the centre of Southend,
containing as it does the HQ of the Employment Service and Customs &
Excise. I doubt if you lived *there*. ;o)
> >> I recall going there [The Elms] at least once - was it on Elm Drive?
> I think I've just about worked it out now - but it was way back in the
> late '60s when I was there.
It's kind of comforting that some things from your past still exist, isn't
it? Anyone living near Hunter's Bar in Sheffield? (There must be a few
students lurking in here....)
Arty Smokes
> We could have a pressure group and write letters to MPs! We
> could go on marches! Hmmm... on second thoughts perhaps we`d
> better skip the marches. Who knows where we`d end up.
Very funny. Now get lost! ;o)
Phil C.
"Rowan Dingle" <din...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b8xIw5BL...@wickenden.demon.co.uk...
I think that`s a slightly different issue. I too know people
who are more Estuarine than their parents. I don`t think the
claim is that only those of Estuary origin speak Estuarine but
rather that a large input of Estuarians pulls the local accent
in that direction. Children tend to grow up with the accent of
their peer group rather than their parents. For comparison I
know English people who have been brought up in Corby
(Northants), which is a Glaswegian enclave, and speak with a
distinct element of Scottish in their accent. However, I
couldn`t comment further without knowing the area you are
referring to.
I suppose the issue of which accent/dialect prevails when
overspillage occurs depends on the numbers involved.
John Dean
Donna Richoux <tr...@euronet.nl> wrote in message
news:1eu0yc4.135ftuo7eaygwN%tr...@euronet.nl...
Collins says ''burr 1. an articulation of (r) characteristic of certain
English dialects, esp. the uvular fricative trill of Northumberland or the
retroflex r of the West of England. 2. a whirring sound''
(whether one led to the other I can't say)
A separate entry says ''burr 1. a small power-driven hand-operated rotary
file, esp. for removing burrs..... 2. a rough edge left on a workpiece after
cutting, drilling etc.''
Collins expresses an opinion that 'burr' the dialect may derive from 'burr'
the rough edge, roughness being the common feature.
I have to say in day to day usage, I always think of 'burr' as particularly
West Country. This is the real-life version of what stage and film actors
call 'Mummerset' which is an appalling mangling of a beautiful dialect.
Robert Newton as Long John Silver was pure Mummerset (Arrr Jim Lad) - if you
can dilute him down to 10 per cent, you're closer to the real thing. If
anyone ever heard John Arlott, cricket commentator, poet and wine
enthusiast, I would say his voice comes into my head when you say 'burr'
--
John Dean -- Oxford
I am anti-spammed -- defrag me to reply
Philip Powell
>"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
>news:IYE8wAMo...@blencathra.org.uk...
>> In message <9eo9is$c21$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty Smokes
>> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
>
>> My oldest friend lives in Leigh - and not that far from Chalkwell Park.
>
>He must be very close to me then, because Chalkwell Park is in Westcliff!
>;o)
>
>> Not to me - lived about 1/4 mile from Chalkwell Station when I was about
>> 6 but can't recall the name of the road [although Baxter Avenue rings a
>> bell].
>
>The only Baxter Avenue in this area is in the centre of Southend,
>containing as it does the HQ of the Employment Service and Customs &
>Excise. I doubt if you lived *there*. ;o)
Actually I did - but that was before the road near Chalkwell Station.
All I can remember of Baxter Avenue is that it ran parallel to the main
road that ran down in front of the old Southend Central Library to
Priory Park and that the Catholic Secondary School was behind us. For
some reason my cousin, who is 2 weeks younger than me, opted for the
grammar school class there rather than WHSG or SHSG whereas my brothers
and I went to WHSB and my sister to SHSG - this always struck me as
rather odd as none of our family were RC and she and her parents were
/terribly/ unconventional.
I also recall living in Mount Avenue which I think was just below or to
the W of Chalkwell Park before we moved to TB.
>
>> >> I recall going there [The Elms] at least once - was it on Elm Drive?
>> I think I've just about worked it out now - but it was way back in the
>> late '60s when I was there.
>
>It's kind of comforting that some things from your past still exist, isn't
>it? Anyone living near Hunter's Bar in Sheffield? (There must be a few
>students lurking in here....)
Funny you should say that - guess which university I attended (-:
Matt Bloomer
<phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>In message <VA.000022e...@office-futures.com>, Roger Whitehead
><r...@office-futures.com> writes
>Whyaye man - theor's soom 'as sez yer anly a jardie if ye cooms froom
>the toon.
What's the northern boundary supposed to be for being a Geordie? I'm
aware that it's supposed to go as far south as the Tyne, but I'm not
aware of the northern one... surely it can't be as far as the border
with Scotland?
--
Matt Bloomer * mailto:maj...@btinternet.com
* http://www.envy.nu/plosch *
'They were lying and they conned me into No. 1. I was hoodwinked.'
Captain Sensible on 'Happy Talk'
Peter P
"Roger Whitehead" <r...@office-futures.com> wrote in message news:VA.000022e3
I come from Portsmouth, of parents from, respectively, Grimsby and
Norfolk.....The accent there was sharper than the country Hampshire accent
and foreigners (i.e. anyone not from the island) sometimes compared it to
Cockney, to our indignant displeasure.
"I understand what you mean about the island (though some may be mystified
not knowing that Portsea is an island) I went to a cramming school (Chivers
and other names) in Southsea where the kids remarked that I did not sound
Gosport (where I lived) but that was because of previously living in Malta
of course. Gosport on the mainland had a different accent to those native to
Portsmouth or Southsea across the harbour of whom we of the mainland accused
of sounding like Cockneys as you wrote. My mother was Cornish but I would
not call her accent as being burred. In my father's native Farnborough the
shop assistants hid from her as they could not understand her sharp screech.
Another correspondent, John Dean mentioned the late John Arlott (another
Hampshire man I believe though I think he veered to Dorset) who certainly
'burred' to my mind though my father's 'county' Hampshire was sharpened by
his being 'Pompey' Division of the navy (you will know about the railings
joke of course-everyone from Portsmouth knows it).
I am sure that you would agree that those from the Isle of Wight across from
Spithead spoke with an accent (a whiny burr) all of their own whilst once
you crossed Portsdown Hill to the north of Portsea Island there was the
'county' Hampshire distinctly different from those of the islands to the
south and again from Gosport.
All of this within sight of each other!
Finally, I detest Estuarine English but enjoy educated Lallans from north of
the border.
Peter P
Roger Whitehead
> my father's 'county' Hampshire was sharpened by
> his being 'Pompey' Division of the navy (you will know about the railings
> joke of course-everyone from Portsmouth knows it).
Going to let the side down here -- no I don't know it.
> Finally, I detest Estuarine English but enjoy educated Lallans from north of
> the border.
Likewise. (Does it occur south of the border?)
Andy Averill
> In article <UDLP6.15039$PQ5.1...@news1.cableinet.net>, Peter P wrote:
> > I live in South Yorkshire where my broad southern vowels stand out like
> > organ stops [snip]
>
> An interesting peregrination. Peter. I come from Portsmouth, of parents
> from, respectively, Grimsby and Norfolk (and you think you're in a
> mess!).
I embarrassed myself terribly once by asking someone what part of Australia
he was from. When he said, "Norfolk" all I could think of to say was, "very
flat, Norfolk."
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Steve Hayes
>> I asked this a few years ago and got mixed answers. Perhaps our current
>> crop of British participants can be clearer. When you describe someone
>> as having a "burr," what do you mean, exactly? Is it the same as being
>> rhotic (pronouncing their R's, the Americans would say)? Or something
>> else?
>>
>> --
>> Thanks --- Donna Richoux
>
>Collins says ''burr 1. an articulation of (r) characteristic of certain
>English dialects, esp. the uvular fricative trill of Northumberland or the
>retroflex r of the West of England. 2. a whirring sound''
>(whether one led to the other I can't say)
>A separate entry says ''burr 1. a small power-driven hand-operated rotary
>file, esp. for removing burrs..... 2. a rough edge left on a workpiece after
>cutting, drilling etc.''
>Collins expresses an opinion that 'burr' the dialect may derive from 'burr'
>the rough edge, roughness being the common feature.
The nearest I got to the West country was Bournemouth, and when I was there I
thought at first, from ther way people spoke, that there must be a lot of
American tourists around. It took me a while to realise that it was locals
speaking.
But then I'm not very good at placing accents. When I first arrived in London
I thought I'd landed in Sydney by mistake, and was suprised when people asked
me if *I* was from Australia.
To me a burr is a seed with lots of hooks on, a bit like a miniature hedgehog,
which probably gave the inventor of Velcro the idea.
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Steve Hayes
<NOSPAMPLEASEIAM...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 May 2001 14:06:30 +0100, Philip Powell
><phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>In message <VA.000022e...@office-futures.com>, Roger Whitehead
>><r...@office-futures.com> writes
>>>Don't Geordies come from Tyneside, especially Newcass'l?
>>Whyaye man - theor's soom 'as sez yer anly a jardie if ye cooms froom
>>the toon.
>
>What's the northern boundary supposed to be for being a Geordie? I'm
>aware that it's supposed to go as far south as the Tyne, but I'm not
>aware of the northern one... surely it can't be as far as the border
>with Scotland?
What about Gyeatsit?
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Stephen Toogood
<haye...@yahoo.com> writes
aforementioned locality) that fine upstanding Gateshead men are
definitely not Geordies.
As for the Geordy boundary, I suggest you place the point of your
compass on the High Level Bridge, open it enough for the pencil to land
just east of Wallsend, and draw a semicircle to the north.
Fine place, County Durham. North of the Tyne? They're all heathens, man.
--
Stephen Toogood
John Dean
Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b10787b...@news.saix.net...
> On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:40:43 +0100, "John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com>
wrote:
>
>
> >> I asked this a few years ago and got mixed answers. Perhaps our current
> >> crop of British participants can be clearer. When you describe someone
> >> as having a "burr," what do you mean, exactly? Is it the same as being
> >> rhotic (pronouncing their R's, the Americans would say)? Or something
> >> else?
> >>
> >> --
>
there I
> thought at first, from ther way people spoke, that there must be a lot of
> American tourists around. It took me a while to realise that it was locals
> speaking.
Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the 'standard'
American accent is a logical extension of West Country
>
> But then I'm not very good at placing accents. When I first arrived in
London
> I thought I'd landed in Sydney by mistake, and was suprised when people
asked
> me if *I* was from Australia.
>
And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
connection', but it's not hard to see how London accents could map into
Strine.
I assume linguists have done the subject to death in various tomes though
I've never encountered one - anyone have a reading list?
Phil C.
>
> "Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:9eo8ek$ci1$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > We could have a pressure group and write letters to MPs!
We
> > could go on marches! Hmmm... on second thoughts perhaps
we`d
> > better skip the marches. Who knows where we`d end up.
>
> Very funny. Now get lost! ;o)
That`s just a typical navigationist attitude. I think those of
us suffering from Directional Deficit Disorder should have our
own newsgroup where we can drone on endlessly about how the
public just don`t understand.
Phil C.
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote
in message news:BKWeUgRhk$D7E...@blencathra.org.uk...
> In message <9eok1e$lqn$3...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty Smokes
> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
> >"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid>
wrote in message
> >news:IYE8wAMo...@blencathra.org.uk...
> >> In message <9eo9is$c21$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty
Smokes
> >> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
> For
> some reason my cousin, who is 2 weeks younger than me, opted
for the
> grammar school class there rather than WHSG or SHSG whereas
my brothers
> and I went to WHSB and my sister to SHSG - this always
struck me as
> rather odd as none of our family were RC and she and her
parents were
> /terribly/ unconventional.
My sister went to St. Bernard`s. I recall that parents had to
fill in a form putting the available schools in order of
preference. My parents dutifully did so and put St Bernard`s
last. A great many others simply didn`t put it on the list. So
those who followed instructions found their daughters
allocated to St Bernards. I went to WHSB. I wasn`t their
favourite pupil. My sixth form school report said "I think he
enjoys his pose as a dimwitted neurotic". I stayed on for
Oxbridge entry and managed to get suspended. Is this a record?
Happy days.
> >It's kind of comforting that some things from your past
still exist, isn't
> >it? Anyone living near Hunter's Bar in Sheffield? (There
must be a few
> >students lurking in here....)
>
> Funny you should say that - guess which university I
attended (-:
My son has recently left Sheffield University. He had a whale
of a time. An infinitely nicer and better adjusted young man
than I ever was.
Roger Whitehead
> Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the 'standard'
> American accent is a logical extension of West Country
The core group of the Pilgrim Fathers came from Nottinghamshire - north
Midlands.
> And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
> connection',
Alleged at an individual level, perhaps, but the convict origins of the
colony are well attested. A few years ago, at Portsmouth, the 200th
anniversary of the first deportations was commemorated.
If you're interested in the topic, a search on "Botany Bay" would probably
tell you more.
Phil C.
"John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote in message
news:9eqkf2$6db$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3b10787b...@news.saix.net...
> > On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:40:43 +0100, "John Dean"
<john...@fragmsn.com>
> wrote:
> > The nearest I got to the West country was Bournemouth, and
when I was
> there I
> > thought at first, from ther way people spoke, that there
must be a lot of
> > American tourists around. It took me a while to realise
that it was locals
> > speaking.
>
> Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me
the 'standard'
> American accent is a logical extension of West Country
Actually the Pilgrim Fathers were a congregation from
Nottinghamshire. Plymouth was just the place they finally
sailed from and has been making much out of little ever since.
Philip Powell
<haye...@yahoo.com> writes
Wrong side of the Tyne (-:
Seriously, I think it is an almost impossible question to answer. For
the best tongue-in-cheek answer, I'd look at the charter for
uk.local.geordie - available at <http://www.usenet.org.uk>.
Arty Smokes
> My son has recently left Sheffield University. He had a whale
> of a time. An infinitely nicer and better adjusted young man
> than I ever was.
I spent my time at Sheffield in the bar and in other people's bedrooms. Is
that a good enough excuse for not turning up to my finals? ;o)
--
Cheers, Arty.
"I need laughter and love, some special drug,
I need cigarettes."
Peter P
"Roger Whitehead" <r...@office-futures.com> wrote in message
Reference my comment
> > Finally, I detest Estuarine English but enjoy educated Lallans from
north of
> > the border.
>
> Likewise. (Does it occur south of the border?)
> >
Point taken but it's like the song
"South of the border, down Mexico way"
Leftpondian-wise it might have been the 49th parallel unless specified.
Peter P
Philip Powell
<nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
>
>"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote
>in message news:BKWeUgRhk$D7E...@blencathra.org.uk...
>> In message <9eok1e$lqn$3...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty Smokes
>> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
>> >"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid>
>wrote in message
>> >news:IYE8wAMo...@blencathra.org.uk...
>> >> In message <9eo9is$c21$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty
>Smokes
>> >> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
>
>> For some reason my cousin, who is 2 weeks younger than me, opted for
>>the grammar school class there rather than WHSG or SHSG whereas my
>>brothers and I went to WHSB and my sister to SHSG - this always
>>struck me as rather odd as none of our family were RC and she and her
>>parents were
>> /terribly/ unconventional.
>
>My sister went to St. Bernard`s.
Thanks - couldn't remember its name at all.
>I recall that parents had to fill in a form putting the available
>schools in order of preference. My parents dutifully did so and put St
>Bernard`s last. A great many others simply didn`t put it on the list.
>So those who followed instructions found their daughters allocated to
>St Bernards.
Was Southend LEA alone in having the odd [for such a c/Conservative
area] attitude that failed to differentiate between the grammar and
secondary modern schools - they were all "High School" IIRC. From what I
remember, those who passed the 11+ received a letter listing the
options, 2 for boys and 3 for girls, and those who failed were simply
informed which school they were going to.
>I went to WHSB. I wasn`t their favourite pupil. My sixth form school
>report said "I think he enjoys his pose as a dimwitted neurotic". I
>stayed on for Oxbridge entry and managed to get suspended. Is this a
>record? Happy days.
You must have crossed paths with the Powells or Archards at some time or
other - the 3 Archard boys were there c1951-67 and the 3 Powells
1959-73.
John Dean
> In article <9eqkf2$6db$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, John Dean wrote:
> > Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the
'standard'
> > American accent is a logical extension of West Country
>
> The core group of the Pilgrim Fathers came from Nottinghamshire - north
> Midlands.
Sorry - I didn't mean to sound as if the PFs all came from the West Country.
I was trying to say that the American accent owes a good deal to the PFs
who were
likely to speak in the manner scholars believe common to the late 16th,
early 17th century which was, in many parts of the country including the
midlands, similar to what is now spoken in the West Country (& round
Oxfordshire & Berkshire & other places) - this is how Shakespeare was
believed to speak & e.g. Walter Raleigh is thought to have said his name
something like Water (with a glottal stop) Rawly. The PFs congregated around
Scrooby but were
originally from many different parts of the country - useful map at
http://www.rootsweb.com/~mosmd/england.htm
>
> > And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
> > connection',
>
> Alleged at an individual level, perhaps, but the convict origins of the
> colony are well attested. A few years ago, at Portsmouth, the 200th
> anniversary of the first deportations was commemorated.
I wasn't disputing that. it was a (perhaps rather leaden) humourous attempt
given that many Australians are touchy about the subject. As you, and
others, say, there is no doubt about the convict origins. Many modern
Australians like to play down their significance & claim the country's white
origins to be more to do with voluntary emigration - not a view I share
>
> If you're interested in the topic, a search on "Botany Bay" would probably
> tell you more.
I would recommend 'First Fleet' as a better entry point into the subject -
through that it is simple to establish that the first major settlement was
70
per cent convict. Contrary to established mathematical expectation, a
majority of Australians claiming descent from the British Isles reckon they
come from the 30 per cent.
Michael Daly
> Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the 'standard'
> American accent is a logical extension of West Country
>
What do you mean by the "standard" American accent? Is this the stereotype
with a drawl or the sort of English spoken by most American television and movie
actors? The reason I'm curious is that the latter is common across all of Canada
and the US and predates (it seems) the influence of Hollywood. I've been very
interested in finding out how it became so ubiquitous.
BTW, I once heard a very old recording of someone, I think he was from Cornwall,
who sounded very much like a modern American.
One thing I've been wondering, is there any evidence that the various British accents
have evolved from a more common accent since, say, the sixteenth century?
Mike
(Canuck with virtually no knowledge of various English accents)
Steve Hayes
>
>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:3b10787b...@news.saix.net...
>> On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:40:43 +0100, "John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I asked this a few years ago and got mixed answers. Perhaps our current
>> >> crop of British participants can be clearer. When you describe someone
>> >> as having a "burr," what do you mean, exactly? Is it the same as being
>> >> rhotic (pronouncing their R's, the Americans would say)? Or something
>> >> else?
>> >>
>> >> --
>>
>> The nearest I got to the West country was Bournemouth, and when I was
>there I
>> thought at first, from ther way people spoke, that there must be a lot of
>> American tourists around. It took me a while to realise that it was locals
>> speaking.
>
>Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the 'standard'
>American accent is a logical extension of West Country
Yes, that thought occurred to me a few days later.
>> But then I'm not very good at placing accents. When I first arrived in
>London
>> I thought I'd landed in Sydney by mistake, and was suprised when people
>asked
>> me if *I* was from Australia.
>>
>And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
>connection', but it's not hard to see how London accents could map into
>Strine.
>
>I assume linguists have done the subject to death in various tomes though
>I've never encountered one - anyone have a reading list?
What I found strange was that Londoners would confuse a South African accent
with an Australian one, when their own accent is far closer to Australian than
ours. I can tell the difference now, but back then we didn't have TV abnd
stuff like that.
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Steve Hayes
<phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>In message <3b107bf6...@news.saix.net>, Steve Hayes
><haye...@yahoo.com> writes
>>On Sat, 26 May 2001 21:32:09 +0100, Matt Bloomer
>><NOSPAMPLEASEIAM...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 May 2001 14:06:30 +0100, Philip Powell
>>><phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>>In message <VA.000022e...@office-futures.com>, Roger Whitehead
>>>><r...@office-futures.com> writes
>>>>>Don't Geordies come from Tyneside, especially Newcass'l?
>>>>Whyaye man - theor's soom 'as sez yer anly a jardie if ye cooms froom
>>>>the toon.
>>>
>>>What's the northern boundary supposed to be for being a Geordie? I'm
>>>aware that it's supposed to go as far south as the Tyne, but I'm not
>>>aware of the northern one... surely it can't be as far as the border
>>>with Scotland?
>>
>>What about Gyeatsit?
>
>Wrong side of the Tyne (-:
Well I always did like Newcastle Brown better than Vaux.
But I couldn't tell the difference between the accents. And where were the
Bleedin Reaces anyway?
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Steve Hayes
<ste...@stenches.nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>As for the Geordy boundary, I suggest you place the point of your
>compass on the High Level Bridge, open it enough for the pencil to land
>just east of Wallsend, and draw a semicircle to the north.
>
>Fine place, County Durham. North of the Tyne? They're all heathens, man.
I like their heathen beer, though.
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Peter Moylan
>> > And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
>> > connection',
>>
>> Alleged at an individual level, perhaps, but the convict origins of the
>> colony are well attested. A few years ago, at Portsmouth, the 200th
>> anniversary of the first deportations was commemorated.
>
>I wasn't disputing that. it was a (perhaps rather leaden) humourous attempt
>given that many Australians are touchy about the subject. As you, and
>others, say, there is no doubt about the convict origins. Many modern
>Australians like to play down their significance & claim the country's white
>origins to be more to do with voluntary emigration - not a view I share
I'm greatly mystified by these comments, because I don't know a
single Australian who wants to play down the significance of the
convict days. Indeed, being able to trace one's family back to a
transported convict is a source of great pride in Australia.
Few of us are able to make that claim, as it happens, but that's
because of the effect of subsequent migration. I'd guess that the
great majority of Australians today are descended from refugees of
one sort of another. (I include economic refugees in that assertion.
In my case, for example, there's little doubt that a potato famine was
to blame.) The very high rate of immigration has tended to swamp
those descended from the earliest white settlers.
But we don't deny the convicts. If anything, we play down our
'newcomer' origins and claim some sort of
cultural descent from the convict settlers. We're proud of our
convict settlers. If you've met someone who isn't, you've met an
atypical Australian.
--
Peter Moylan pe...@ee.newcastle.edu.au
See http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au for OS/2 information and software
Phil C.
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote
in message news:RlYq$PCFPU...@blencathra.org.uk...
> In message <9eqkmh$6iu$2...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Phil C.
> <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
> >
> >"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid>
wrote
> >in message news:BKWeUgRhk$D7E...@blencathra.org.uk...
> >> In message <9eok1e$lqn$3...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty
Smokes
> >> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
> >> >"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid>
> >wrote in message
> >> >news:IYE8wAMo...@blencathra.org.uk...
> >> >> In message <9eo9is$c21$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Arty
> >Smokes
> >> >> <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> writes
> Was Southend LEA alone in having the odd [for such a
c/Conservative
> area] attitude that failed to differentiate between the
grammar and
> secondary modern schools - they were all "High School" IIRC.
From what I
> remember, those who passed the 11+ received a letter listing
the
> options, 2 for boys and 3 for girls, and those who failed
were simply
> informed which school they were going to.
Didn`t Chelmsford also call itself a High School? Perhaps it
was an Essex thing. The area where I now live (Lincs, The Land
that Time Forgot) also retained its primeval selection system.
Here the Grammar School calls itself that. The new headmaster
came from WHSB which apparently does very well in the league
tables and gets glowing reports. I wonder if it deserves it.
It always did very well academically because of its position
in a London commuter/emigrant area. Hardly a tough nut to
crack. It used to get very good results in my day in spite a
general air of neglect as George Cloke waited to retire.
> You must have crossed paths with the Powells or Archards at
some time or
> other - the 3 Archard boys were there c1951-67 and the 3
Powells
> 1959-73.
My brother and I (Crouch) were there c1960-69. The Archard
name rings a slight bell (an Andrew in my brother`s class?)
but it was all so long ago and far away. As the black sheep of
my family, I`ve scarcely been back since I was 18. In those
days one applied to Universities as far away as possible from
home. These days the opposite seems to apply. I`ll go back one
day. "I must go back to Old Leigh again, to the lonely sea and
the sky" "And are there cockles still for tea?"
Steve Hayes
>Sorry - I didn't mean to sound as if the PFs all came from the West Country.
>I was trying to say that the American accent owes a good deal to the PFs
>who were
>likely to speak in the manner scholars believe common to the late 16th,
>early 17th century which was, in many parts of the country including the
>midlands, similar to what is now spoken in the West Country (& round
>Oxfordshire & Berkshire & other places) - this is how Shakespeare was
>believed to speak & e.g. Walter Raleigh is thought to have said his name
>something like Water (with a glottal stop) Rawly. The PFs congregated around
>Scrooby but were
>originally from many different parts of the country - useful map at
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~mosmd/england.htm
Interesting - in South Africa there is a well-known make of bicycle called
"Raleigh", and it is universally pronounced "Rally". When I went to England
they were advertised on TV it was pronounced "Rah-leigh", which sounded
affected to me, but then I also came across Cartholics who went to Maas and
spoke of plarstic utensils.
But nobody pronounced it "Rawley".
I have haard, however, that Halley whose name was given to Halley's comet
probably pronounced his name "Hawley".
>
>>
>> > And ditto - they're very touchy in Oz about the (alleged) 'convict
>> > connection',
>>
>> Alleged at an individual level, perhaps, but the convict origins of the
>> colony are well attested. A few years ago, at Portsmouth, the 200th
>> anniversary of the first deportations was commemorated.
>
>I wasn't disputing that. it was a (perhaps rather leaden) humourous attempt
>given that many Australians are touchy about the subject. As you, and
>others, say, there is no doubt about the convict origins. Many modern
>Australians like to play down their significance & claim the country's white
>origins to be more to do with voluntary emigration - not a view I share
>>
>> If you're interested in the topic, a search on "Botany Bay" would probably
>> tell you more.
>
>I would recommend 'First Fleet' as a better entry point into the subject -
>through that it is simple to establish that the first major settlement was
>70
>per cent convict. Contrary to established mathematical expectation, a
>majority of Australians claiming descent from the British Isles reckon they
>come from the 30 per cent.
>--
>John Dean -- Oxford
>I am anti-spammed -- defrag me to reply
>
>
>
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Steve Hayes
>"John Dean" <john...@fragmsn.com> wrote in message news:9eqkf2$6db$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>> Not surprising - Pilgrim Fathers & all that. It seems to me the 'standard'
>> American accent is a logical extension of West Country
>>
>
>What do you mean by the "standard" American accent? Is this the stereotype
>with a drawl or the sort of English spoken by most American television and movie
>actors? The reason I'm curious is that the latter is common across all of Canada
>and the US and predates (it seems) the influence of Hollywood. I've been very
>interested in finding out how it became so ubiquitous.
I've often heard of a "drawl", but have no idea what it is or what it is
supposed to sound like. But I think the similarity is based on the "burr" in
the subject line, or what some in AUE call "rhotic" - a pronounciation of the
letter R that is common to West country accents in England and most North
American English accents.
In South Africa, the letter R is not pronounced in many words, but indicates
the value of the preceding vowel - car, cart, park, pork, cork and so on. It
is a feature of some South African accents that there is an analogous
assimilation to the "cot" "caught" one in American English that Richard is so
fascinated by. In South African English the "ah" vowel in car, park etc often
becomes asimilated to the "aw" vowel in "pork" and "cork", so that to English
speakers from elsewhere, some South Africans sound as if they are saying "I'll
pawk the caw in the caw pawk".
In UK English, however, the letter R is often inserted in speech where it is
absent in writing - "law" is pronounced "lore", for example.
Written UK pronounciation SA pronounciation
law and order Laura Norder lawned awda
I think those examples will convey the distinction to British English
speakers, but perhaps not to US ones, because US English seems to lack the
"aw" vowel.
>BTW, I once heard a very old recording of someone, I think he was from Cornwall,
>who sounded very much like a modern American.
>
>One thing I've been wondering, is there any evidence that the various British accents
>have evolved from a more common accent since, say, the sixteenth century?
I wonder if the regional differences did not arise from different languages,
or at least dialects, from Wesex, Mercia, Northumbria etc, which have
gradually drawn closer with universal education and mass media.
Incidentally, I was discussing England and the English with someone in
soc.culture.south-africa and Hengist and Horsa came up. He asked if Hengist
was responsible for the good-looking English people and Horsa was responsible
for the ones of equine countenance. I pointed out that if he knew Afrikaans,
he would have known that Hengist meant "stallion" - the Afrikaans for stallion
is "hings" and is derived from the Dutch "hengst". Dutch and Afrikaans are
diverging rapidly because of distance, and in pronounciation Dutch is a lot
closer to English than Afrikaans is, in spite of Afrikaans-speaking people
mixing with English ones. The Dutch "uitsmijter" (bouncer, or a ham and egg
sandwich) is pronounced almost identically with the English "out smiter", but
the Afrikaans pronounciastion is altogether different, and almost impossible
to represent in English. The diphthong "ui" begins with a sound rather like
the "e" in the US prounciation of "herb", followed by a long i.
Steve Hayes
http://www.suite101.com/myhome.cfm/methodius
Arty Smokes
> day. "I must go back to Old Leigh again, to the lonely sea and
> the sky" "And are there cockles still for tea?"
Yeah, there are still a few cockle sheds in a row near the Smack and the
Peterboat. Great if you like eating mouthfuls of grit. ;o)
The local council wants to ban cars from driving down old Leigh in summer,
because the local residents (myself included) hate it when all the
Southend and Basildon beer boys come down in their XR3s. It was very
pleasant down there in the sun the other day, but the seafood stalls can
make it a bit smelly sometimes.
--
Cheers, Arty.
http://www.smokindesign.co.uk
Peter P
Walter Raleigh is thought to have said his name something like Water (with
a glottal stop) Rawly. The PFs congregated around
> >originally from many different parts of the country - useful map at
> >http://www.rootsweb.com/~mosmd/england.htm
>
> Interesting - in South Africa there is a well-known make of bicycle called
> "Raleigh", and it is universally pronounced "Rally". When I went to
England
> they were advertised on TV it was pronounced "Rah-leigh", which sounded
> affected to me, but then I also came across Cartholics who went to Maas
and
> spoke of plarstic utensils.
>
> But nobody pronounced it "Rawley".
>
> I have haard, however, that Halley whose name was given to Halley's comet
> probably pronounced his name "Hawley".
>
I have never heard Halley pronounced Hawley and though I have the broad
vowels of the south I have used and heard 'Rally' as the name of the bike
since it (Raleigh) was the make of my first one about 1930 and that was in
Hampshire. I have heard the name pronounced Rawley but usually jocularly.
Only on one or two occasions have I heard Mass pronounced other than as
written and with a narrow 'A'. The exceptions have been usually towards Maws
The pronunciation Cartholic is rare and even rarer is 'plarstic' IMHO though
my Yorkshire friends hereabout say (to my surprise) that I tend towards it
My Hampshire grandfather (born about 1850) was named George but called
himself Jarge and referred to a fork as a fark- rather to the consternation
of my Cornish mother whose own speech pattern was most odd in any case.
Another interesting vowel change that I heard many years back was of two
girls having their joint portraits taken by an old fashioned photographer
and as he disappeared beneath the black cloth one girl asked the other as to
what he was doing and her knowledgeable companion said that he was going to
focus. "What both of us"? cried her startled companion..
Philip Powell
<nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
>
>My brother and I (Crouch) were there c1960-69. The Archard
>name rings a slight bell (an Andrew in my brother`s class?)
So your brother was Stephen? Andrew was in my class too and we've been
friends for 40 years - in fact, he's the only person in Southend with
whom I have any contact. Small world (-:
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
[..]
>Interesting - in South Africa there is a well-known make of bicycle called
>"Raleigh", and it is universally pronounced "Rally". When I went to England
>they were advertised on TV it was pronounced "Rah-leigh", which sounded
>affected to me, but then I also came across Cartholics who went to Maas and
>spoke of plarstic utensils.
>
My dad worked at the Raleigh Cycle Works, which is based in
Nottingham, my home town, for 40 years, and there it's pronounced with
a short 'a' -- 'rally'. The 'rahley' and 'rawley' versions are from
southerners (from south of the river Trent) trying to sound posh! :)
>But nobody pronounced it "Rawley".
>
I've heard the town of Raleigh (in North Carolina, I think) pronounced
as 'Rawley' and 'Rahley' by Americans.
--
wrmst rgrds
RB...(docr...@ntlworld.com)
Arty Smokes
"Dr Robin Bignall" <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:dl75htcnkfgfqnfn4...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 May 2001 09:35:11 GMT, haye...@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes)
> wrote:
> >Interesting - in South Africa there is a well-known make of bicycle
called
> >"Raleigh", and it is universally pronounced "Rally". When I went to
England
> >they were advertised on TV it was pronounced "Rah-leigh", which sounded
> >affected to me, but then I also came across Cartholics who went to Maas
and
> >spoke of plarstic utensils.
> >
> My dad worked at the Raleigh Cycle Works, which is based in
> Nottingham, my home town, for 40 years, and there it's pronounced with
> a short 'a' -- 'rally'. The 'rahley' and 'rawley' versions are from
> southerners (from south of the river Trent) trying to sound posh! :)
I was gonna point that out. But how do the locals up there pronounce Sir
Walter's surname?
I've known a few posh gits talk about Operation "Rah-lee" (in fact, I
think that's what Prince William was doing in South America last year) but
I've never seen it written down, so I'm not sure if that was an
affectation.
--
Arty
http://www.smokindesign.co.uk
There is a light that never goes out...
Phil C.
"Philip Powell" <phi...@blencathra.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote
in message news:lZYnwXEF...@blencathra.org.uk...
> In message <9et3s9$6cp$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, Phil C.
> <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> writes
> >
> >My brother and I (Crouch) were there c1960-69. The Archard
> >name rings a slight bell (an Andrew in my brother`s class?)
>
> So your brother was Stephen? Andrew was in my class too and
we've been
> friends for 40 years - in fact, he's the only person in
Southend with
> whom I have any contact. Small world (-:
I`m afraid I have to claim the Anti-Social Git Prize. I never
kept in touch with anyone. I looked at the area on the map
today and had a shock. It`s so small! I vaguely felt I lived
miles from the sea. In fact it was nearer than my local
village is to me now. When I pick my boy child up from the
"local" railway station it`s about the same distance as Leigh
is from Chelmsford. I bet even the cockles have shrunk.
Phil C.
>
> "Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:9et3s9$6cp$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > day. "I must go back to Old Leigh again, to the lonely sea
and
> > the sky" "And are there cockles still for tea?"
>
> Yeah, there are still a few cockle sheds in a row near the
Smack and the
> Peterboat. Great if you like eating mouthfuls of grit. ;o)
> The local council wants to ban cars from driving down old
Leigh in summer,
> because the local residents (myself included) hate it when
all the
> Southend and Basildon beer boys come down in their XR3s. It
was very
> pleasant down there in the sun the other day, but the
seafood stalls can
> make it a bit smelly sometimes.
How times change. Now if I had some cockles I would be
thinking of a light pasta dish. Back in them days we just used
to shovel them in drowned in industrial-strength vinegar.
We`ve all got gentrified. When we had a German exchange
student last year we took her to Skegness for the day. There
was actually a cafe on the seafront selling stilton and celery
soup.
Nero
>> >On 25 May 2001, I take it that "Phil C."
>
>I think that`s a slightly different issue. I too know people
>who are more Estuarine than their parents. I don`t think the
>claim is that only those of Estuary origin speak Estuarine but
>rather that a large input of Estuarians pulls the local accent
>in that direction.
>
>I suppose the issue of which accent/dialect prevails when
>overspillage occurs depends on the numbers involved.
>-- .
>Phil C.
In recent years there has certainly been a significant movement of population
into the West Country, largely from the South East. During the floods a few
months ago there was an item from Devon on the national TV News in which both
the rescued householder and the rescuing fireman were both obviously Londoners !
I have seen a figure of some 400,000 for the net movement into the South West
but cannot remember the relevant time over which this occurred (ten years ?).
Some may remember the recent "Routes of English" programme about Cornwall, where
the speech of local teenagers is apparently merging with new influences and
losing its distinctiveness. Local accents are now sometimes seen as undesirable
by teenagers, most of whom these days will also leave home to enter Higher
Education, as opposed to a much smaller fraction some decades ago.
Neil
Laura F Spira
>
> "Arty Smokes" <ne...@smokindesign.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:9eok1f$lqn$4...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > "Phil C." <nob...@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:9eo8ek$ci1$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > > We could have a pressure group and write letters to MPs!
> We
> > > could go on marches! Hmmm... on second thoughts perhaps
> we`d
> > > better skip the marches. Who knows where we`d end up.
> >
> > Very funny. Now get lost! ;o)
>
> That`s just a typical navigationist attitude. I think those of
> us suffering from Directional Deficit Disorder should have our
> own newsgroup where we can drone on endlessly about how the
> public just don`t understand.
>
Just to let you know that I had a record weekend, getting lost in the
garden centre (nearly had to spend £3000 on a fancy shed before the
salesman would point me in the right direction) and having a search
party come to find me after I wandered off track returning from the loo
at a friend's house (well, it is a *big* house). Do you think a
satellite tracking system could be helpful?
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
wanderer
< snip >
> We`ve all got gentrified. When we had a German exchange
> student last year we took her to Skegness for the day. There
> was actually a cafe on the seafront selling stilton and celery
> soup.
Skeggie! Gentrified? Once was enough!
Ah, must be some gentle irony! < g >
Regards
--
The Wanderer
Meditate - it's better than sitting doing nothing.
wanderer
>
< snip>
> by teenagers, most of whom these days will also leave home to enter Higher
> Education, as opposed to a much smaller fraction some decades ago.
>
Ah, but in those days higher education was a means to a higher education -
nowadays I think it serves as a means for many to put off the evil hour when
they've actually got to work for a living - or sign on!
Regards,
--
The Wanderer
(Now bringing head below the parapet)
Always borrow from a pessimist.
He doesn't expect to be repaid.