Editor for this issue: Annemarie Valdez <avaldez
emunix.emich.edu>
When the PBS News Hour was still McNeill/Lehrer, I noticed that
Lehrer emphasized copulas and auxiliaries whereas McNeill did not.
This occurred (and still does) in the introduction of discussions
following the news summary ("Our first topic IS the crisis in X";
"Now we DO go on to a newsmaker interview with X"). McNeill happened
to be giving a reading at Black Oak Books in Berkeley a couple of
years ago, and I asked him about this practice. He said he had,
indeed, noticed it in Lehrer's speech, and didn't know why Jim
did it, but that he considered it inappropriate for himself. As I
recall, he said it was a kind of general tendency in journalese
that he deplored.
Dan Slobin (slobin
cogsci)
Psychology, University of California, Berkeley
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I have noticed myself using this sort of intonation. I don't now recall the details of specific situations. The generic occasion involves labelling myself, or someone, or a thing, as a member of some one category vs. other candidate possibilities, or as being in one of a series or set of predefined states. Making up a scenario: The sign says "pick up your packet here if you have registered in advance." I step to the position under that sign. "Do you have my packet?" The person there looks up inquiringly. "I *have* registered in advance." This seems to me directly related to contrastive stress: "I *am* eating my lima beans, mommie!" (Or in the old anecdote about children's repartee, "Behave!" "I *am* being have!" :-) In the airline world, the plane moves from one predefined state to another, and passenger status shifts from "seat belts on" to "seat belts off" and so on. I take this to be the primary basis of this usage. Other instances may occur. Things like "items DO have a tendency to shift during flight" may be ordinary emphasis. "Mmm! I DO like butterscotch!" Contributors to Linguist have cited things like "we *have* enjoyed having you on board today, and hope that you *will* choose (name of airline) the next time you fly." These I haven't noticed (just completed another RT Boston-San Francisco last week), but that may just be my not attending. A legitimate sublanguage or occupational dialect characteristic may have developed and spread from airline attendants (or an earlier source) to other shepherders-around of the public. But the basis in common usage doesn't seem to me mysterious or unreasonable. Bruce NevinMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Anton Sherwood (dasherMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuenetcom.com) wrote: >For as long _as_ I can remember (I didn't watch much tv _before_ >about twenty years ago), news-readers _on_ television have had the >_peculiar_ habit of emphasizing prepositions and other _relatively_ >insignificant words. I imagine this a side effect of trying to read naturally from teleprompters, like the exagerated body motions - twiches, in fact - that many talking heads seem to have. They're a foredoomed attempt to leave you with the impression that they aren't reading from a teleprompter. Further in regard to the subject of bad emphasis, I've noticed that many American writers, in indicating emphasis with capitalization, boldface or italics, tend to emphasize the word after THE word that I as a speaker of American English would expect to be emphasized (to give an example). In this case I've always supposed that this was an orthographical error, and did not reflect the writer's actual spoken usage. John E. Koontz NIST:CAML:DCISD 888.02 Boulder, CO john.koontz
nist.gov
In the late 50's or early 60's, I heard a recorded comedy routine in which a sports announcer quoted a football coach carefully instructing his players on proper decorum on the field if a game was being televised. Principally, the coach reminded his players that the camera sees all and that they were to keep their hands away from "certain parts OF your body." The placement of the emphasis turned the advice into a formula or incantation, with an implication also that the coach didn't really expect that his advice would be followed. As in the airport and crew-member announcements, the emphasis marks the admonitory, routine, and probably futile nature of the utterances it occurs in. The coach's content-empty 'of' worked as well as a 'do' from a deconstructed verb.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue