Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <marty
linguistlist.org>
I began speaking English actively at home and at school at the age of seven, which was in 1950 (up to then I only spoke Dutch). One change that I noticed is the replacement of "French" pronunciations of geographical names in standard American English by the previously vernacular spelling-conditioned "impressionistic" pronunciation, e.g. Illinois [YlYnwa] > [YlYn9ys] (where "Y" is crossed or dotless "i", "9" is turned-around "c"). Albuquerque [0lbukMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueRk] > [&lbuk
Rki] (where "0" is turned-around "a", "&" is "a-e" ligature, "
" is turned-around "e", "R" is turned-around "r") In elementary school, I was still taught the "French" pronunciation. As older teenager (I think I was 16 or 17) I read an article either in "Life" or in "Saturday Evening Post" magazine, which discussed the shift in "recieved" pronunciation in progress at that time. The "materialization" of originally mute final "e" of the spelling as /i/ in the latter example is rather widespread (and not restricted to geographical names). Yosemite [yos
mayt] > [yosEmYti/ (where "E" is "epsilon") Irene [ayri:n] > [ayrini] The pronunciation of the prefix _anti-_ seems to have shifted from [&ntY] or [&nti] to [&ntay], which is perhaps a further feature of the same general process. I somehow can't seem to remember anymore, how I had been originally taught to pronounce the prefix _semi-_, but for some reason I was surprised to note people pronouncing it [simay] the last few decades. Was it perhaps formerly pronounced [semi] or [semY]? (Compare [hemysfi
R] in _hemisphere_). Another feature seems to be the use of _like_ at the beginning of sentences and phrases in colloquial American English. In my early youth, I never encountered it in the speech of any of my American school pals. The first time I met with the phenomenon was in "Mad" magazine around 1959 or 1960, when it was still explicitly characterized as Californian colloquial or youth. Some years ago I had to share a compartment in an overfilled train (here in Europe) with a bunch of college students from the Mid West, and was deeply amused to note how they'd have this feature like in just about every other sentence they uttered. Finally, on the "fronting" of the vowel in _food_ noted by Marie-Lucie Tarpent (Re 9.668), which was I think aptly interpreted by Marc Hamann (Re 9.676#1) as <cut> My analysis is that the change > is from [uw] to [iw], where "i" here represents a high central or back > unrounded nucleus.<cut> I have noticed this shift in the word _suit_ [syut] / [suwt] to [sIwt] where "I" is IPA "ligatured" Cyrillic "b-l" (unrounded high central) since the closing 1950s, at which time I still perceived it as colloquial or perhaps even slang. As I have personally never been in the New World, these observations on American English were all made "from a distance". Regards to all, Waruno - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Waruno Mahdi tel: +49 30 8413-5404 Faradayweg 4-6 fax: +49 30 8413-3155 14195 Berlin email: mahdi
fhi-berlin.mpg.de Germany WWW: http://w3.rz-berlin.mpg.de/~wm/ - ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 9 May 1998, LINGUIST Network <linguistMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuelinguistlist.org> wrote: > >-------------------------------- Message 2 ------------------------------- > >Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 21:58:24 -0700 (PDT) >From: bwald
HUMnet.UCLA.EDU (bwald) >Subject: Re: 9.668, Disc: Recent Change in English > > >So, what's "new" is basically that the pattern indeed seems to have >become more productive as of late -- but how many of you are >comfortable with: > >yesterday we sight*saw*, so today we'll go back to the conference > >I type*wrote* the paper on my old Olivetti But we can refer to a typewritten paper. I've also seen a lot of people turn "copyright" into "copywrite," and then they produce forms like "copywritten" and "copywrote"" instead of "copyrighted." > >(Of course, you prefer "typed" nowadays, but ignore that -- if you >can) > >Here's a good one: > > The plane nose*dove* into the field. Funny, I'd say "nosedived" for some reason. > Otherwise, the fact that there are always particular new lexical >items arising based on Noun+Verb is a lexical matter, and not >particularly interesting to anyone except lexicographers. NB I >haven't *proofread* this message. I have also noticed a nearly universal acceptance of "snuck" as the past tense of "sneak," something that was frowned on when I was in school all through the 70's. And the use of the nominal pronoun forms in object positions, mainly when two pronouns occur together, seems to be getting more common. "Between you and I" and "for you and I" are the most common combinations, but there is a popular song out now with the line, "...say a little prayer for I." . >-------------------------------- Message 3 ------------------------------- > >Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 01:02:51 EDT >From: PBarr21106 <PBarr21106
aol.com> >Subject: Re: 9.668, Disc: Recent Change in English > > My daughter (23) pronounces food and movies as you describe, very >forward in the mouth to start with, then a shift back. Neither my >wife nor I nor my son speak this way. I think it is a teen-age girl >pronunciation that may have begun in California. There was an article >in the NYT magazine a couple of years ago on the fact that there is a >nation-wide teen-speak. Not being a linguist, I'm not exactly sure if you're describing what I have noticed, mainly among young people, especially girls and women. It seems that many of them produce speech that I would call "choppy." The words seem clipped, and some of the vowels seem slightly different. For example, "yeah" often sounds like "yah" (with the "a" as in "back"). Since I've noticed it mainly on TV, I assume it started on the West Coast. I guess it is what "Valley Girl" speech has evolved into. Kevin Caldwell kdcaldw
interserv.com
Strange that you mention the South. It seems to be virtually non-existent here in Mississippi and other areas of the South I've lived in. It is somewhat common in parts of Appalachia, especially Tennessee and Kentucky in my experience, where it seems to be replacing /yu/; e.g. "news" /nyu:z/ > /nU:z/ I've noticed that the same people who front /u/ also tend to pronounce /i:/ [and sometimes /E/ ] as /ey/, e.g. "people" /pi:pl/ > /peypl/ and consequently there are anecdotes about waiters who confuse "French" and "Ranch" dressing because they sound alike /freynch/ vs /reynch/ All in all, I've rarely heard /U/ fronting outside of Appalachia in North America Something that's more common in the South is that final /l/ is often dropped, especially after /u:/; e.g. "school" /sku:l, sku:w/ > /sku:/ In sociolinguistics, the old time "Southern" accent which dropped /r/ and pronounced /u:/ as /yu:/ seems to be dying out among Whites. In the Deep South, except for maybe coastal areas, it's uncommon to hear anyone under 50 or so speak that way. What I'm picking up on is that middle and upper income Whites, tend to imitate Midwest English and often even use "you guys" --a typical "yankeeism" as opposed to y'all; while working class Whites will often speak similar to people from Appalachia e.g. "dance" as /deyns/ and pronounce final /r/ but retain "y'all" instead of "you'uns" and don't front /u/. My Black students still tend to speak with a Deep South accent. So it's intriguing to hear older White alumnae speak with the same accent as younger Black students while younger White students speak very differently. My guess is that this is largely due to the effect of "segregation academies" which, I'm told, stigmatize the local accent. Outside the South I have noticed is that northerners more and more pronounce /aw/ as /ow/ like Canadians; e.g. "out" /awt/ > /owt/. My olsest daughter attends school in Massachusetts and it's really noticeable among her friends and when she comes back for break And finally, as I suppose most people know, there seems to be a patalization of initial velars by younger people from the West Coast "cool" spelled as "kewl" where /ku:w[l]/ > /kyu:w[l]/ > >Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 11:10:34 -0400 (EDT) >From: Paul Johnston <JOHNSTONPMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuewmich.edu> >Subject: Re: 9.668, Disc: Recent Change in English > >The lowering of /E/ that Marie-Lucie Tarpent mentions is certainly >widespread in the Great Lakes States; it seems to be fostered by >preceding labials of all kinds--I don't know, but it could be part of >a chain shift involving a parellel (and more widespread) lowering of >/I/ after labials, as in milk. Certainly, among my Western Michigan >students, all the students that lower /E/ also lower /I/ (and >possibly /ae/!)., >/u/-fronting, once restricted to Ulster, Mid and Southwest Scotland >(where it applies to the OUT class of words), large swatches of the >Midlands of England, Norfolk, and Devon/East Cornwall, the Southern >Hemisphere dialects and the American South, seems to be becoming >close to a universal in English. Can anyone think of American >dialects that are resisting it? In Britain, Northeastern Scots, >Orkney and Shetland, Northeastern English dialects and Welsh English >are the only ones I can think of. > Paul Johnston > Western Michigan U. > > Re: "egg" as "agg", to my ears, this sounds like South African, Australian and New Zealand English. One of the things that makes Xena so funny is when a character speaking with an American accent does this. I also pick up what sounds like "bag" as "beg" from South Africans, Australians and New Zealanders. I've wondered if these 2 sounds have been reduced to an intermediate sound which seems to outsiders like its counterpart. Sort of like "pen" vs. "pin" in much of the US. What you often hear in Appalachia is /eyg/, or even /ey
g/ for /Eg/ Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 11:47:58 -0400 From: MARC PICARD <picard
vax2.concordia.ca> Subject: Re: 9.676, Disc: Recent Change in English Marc Hamann wrote: > If I understand correctly, you mean pronouncing "egg" and "beg" as > though they were "agg" and "bag". I don't think this is the proper representation of this pronunciation. It's more like "ague" and "bague". When I have my students transcribe words like these, I always get a few that write /e:g/ for /Eg/, and so on. I've never heard Americans do this, and I've never been able to figure out exactly where in Canada this pronunciation is common. Marc Picard Rick Mc Callister W-1634 MUW Columbus MS 39701 rmccalli
sunmuw1.muw.edu
On Sat, 9 May 1998, Benji wrote: > how many of you are comfortable with: > > yesterday we sight*saw*, so today we'll go back to the conference > > I type*wrote* the paper on my old Olivetti These are clearly horrible (especially the first), BUT they are better than the regularized past tenses: sightseed, typewrited, which for me add an extra asterisk to whatever Benji's version had. > ... > The plane nose*dove* into the field. This one is almost OK. Here I like 'nosedived' better, but the past tense of dive is in flux (or at least was when I was learning English s.t. in the last century (if nobody else will wait until 2001 to get to the next century/millennium, I'm gonna beat 'em to the punch). > Otherwise, the fact that there are always particular new lexical > items arising based on Noun+Verb is a lexical matter, and not > particularly interesting to anyone except lexicographers. NB I > haven't *proofread* this message. As these comments (Both Benji's and mine) show, there is plenty of morphological interest in these phenomena. Not that there's anything wrong with lexicographers. Some of my best friends (including me) are. Jim James L. Fidelholtz e-mail: jfidelMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuecen.buap.mx Maestri'a en Ciencias del Lenguaje Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades Beneme'rita Universidad Auto'noma de Puebla, ME'XICO