Quote from: aswnl on January 30, 2010, 12:00:39 PM
Comparing Dutch to Afrikaans is more like comparing Norwegian to Icelandic.
there's already so much difference, even though the languages first diverged in the 1600s?
when did US and UK English start to diverge? 1609? 1776? Webster's reform in the 1820s?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 30, 2010, 01:13:31 PMthere's already so much difference, even though the languages first diverged in the 1600s?
Yup. This is not too surprising. Chaucer's English is noticeably different from Shakespeare's, even though the two are separated by only 250 years. Dialect makes a difference too--
Gawain and the Green Knight was written at about the same time as the
Canterbury Tales but since it is in a Northern dialect, it is essentially unintelligible to modern English speakers. Swiss German is theoretically intelligible to speakers of modern standard German but I know a few German-speaking Swiss who get very uncomfortable when asked what the word for something or other is in standard German. Meanwhile, there is no guarantee that an American speaker of Low German (which was the language of hearth and school in much of the farming Midwest before World War I) would be able to pick up a book written in standard German and read it with any facility. There are differences in pronunciation which bleed through to the way words are spelled because German is, in general and unlike English, an orthographically efficient language. (There are exceptions but they are confined--the ones I know about are placenames derived from Slavic languages, like the ones ending in -
ow which you encounter frequently in Berlin/Brandenburg and are pronounced with English
w rather than German
w.)
Quotewhen did US and UK English start to diverge? 1609? 1776? Webster's reform in the 1820s?
They started diverging as soon as there were communities of English speakers on either side of the Atlantic who were not in regular contact with each other--essentially, during the colonial period. What Webster did in the 1820's was primarily a shallow spelling reform and has no effect on the mutual intelligibility of US and UK English because English in general is an orthographically defective language. Far more important for intelligibility is the divergent meanings which are applied to words and set phrases whose denotative meanings are well understood in both countries. For example, an educated speaker in England would have to mentally shift gears to understand the word "enabler" used in the pop-psychology sense (i.e. a person who gives another the wherewithal to continue a maladaptative or self-destructive behavior), while an educated speaker in America might not pick up instantly on the historical or cultural references embedded in phrases like "a little local difficulty" or "A taking tea with B." We also use verbs intransitively which British speakers expect to be used transitively, and vice versa. We use verbs transitively which they expect to be used intransitively, and vice versa. Dialects add another layer of complication. American dialects tend to be understood relatively well abroad because many of the immigrant groups associated with those dialects still have the home population in the UK and counterpart immigrant populations in other English-speaking countries, and we export dialectical speech heavily in movies and TV. On the other hand, there are lots of British dialects (for example, really broad Yorkshire) which are not well understood in the US. There is also a wide divergence in pronunciation, going well beyond the rhotic versus non-rhotic divide to variations in vowel quantity according to consonant position, which can make even the Received Pronunciation accent rather hard for educated Americans to understand without subtitling.
Because I am deaf and communicate largely in writing, I can largely sidestep these problems, but I have immense trouble lipreading
r because it can look like "ah" in some places and "w" in others. Meanwhile, the Glasgow accent is one of the very few British accents that
are rhotic and I know a few Glaswegians who say they are afraid to open their mouths in England because they fear being misunderstood or ridiculed.
What does it mean to be an orthographically defective language? I'm also not sure what you mean by intransitively vs. transitively used verbs (examples?).
I believe the spelling differences between US and UK English are due to the fact that spelling was not standardized until after the American Revolution, so each country decided to make their standards a little different.
The orthography of a language is said to be defective if there is no simple one-to-one correspondence between each phoneme (distinct sound in the language) and each grapheme (distinct written mark) that can be used to write it down. As an example, consider the vowel sound schwa, whose IPA representation is an upside-down e. The schwa is unique to English but has no single corresponding grapheme--it can be written using any of the vowel letters (a, e, i, o, u, and y.) We also use sh to represent some hard-s sounds while we use -tion where the hard s sound is part of a suffix that turns a verb into a noun. There are many, many other examples. English is also not the only language with defective orthography; French is notorious for it too. In contradistinction, Italian and Spanish come very close to having a one-to-one correspondence between sounds and letters, so you can pronounce words as written in either language without having to worry about mispronouncing them.
English orthography was essentially standardized by Samuel Johnson's dictionary in 1755. The main change Webster made in his own dictionary in 1828 was to drop u in final -our and change c to s in words like licence and defence (British speakers sometimes mischievously suggest that their system is better because, for example, it clearly distinguishes between the verb for "to issue a license," which is spelled license in Britain, and the noun referring to the license that is issued, which is licence). But this is a skin-deep change and it is possible to write many consecutive complete sentences without encountering words which are spelled differently in the US and Britain.
Wikipedia has additional detail:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_spelling
A verb is said to be used transitively if it has a direct object. It is used intransitively if it does not have a direct object. Some verbs can be used transitively in some contexts and intransitively in others. Some of these verbs have one meaning when used transitively and a slightly different meaning when used intransitively. Other verbs can be used transitively only, and sound strange when used intransitively, and vice versa.
Examples: "I came to kill him"--kill in this sentence is transitive. "Tiredness can kill"--kill is intransitive.
"He lives"--live can be used intransitively only (except with a cognate object: i.e., a noun which equates to the result or product of the action implied by the intransitive verb). "He lived through the war"--still used intransitively, but the prepositional phrase "through the war" allows the verb to take over some of the functions of a transitive verb (the meaning in this example is similar to "He endured the war," where endure is a transitive verb). "He lives my life" (song title, BTW) is an example of an intransitive verb being used transitively with a cognate object ("he slept a troubled sleep" is Wikipedia's own example). Bend the rules a little, like "He lived the story," and you have the beginnings of a movie tagline.
I will keep an eye out for examples of US/UK differences in the use of transitive and intransitive verbs. I have observed in the past that such differences exist but I am not able at the moment to remember specific cases.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2010, 03:16:10 PM
As an example, consider the vowel sound schwa, whose IPA representation is an upside-down e. The schwa is unique to English but has no single corresponding grapheme--it can be written using any of the vowel letters (a, e, i, o, u, and y.)
much to the consternation of spelling bee contestants everywhere. I got eliminated from the regionals all three times on a schwa sound.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 30, 2010, 04:39:14 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2010, 03:16:10 PM
As an example, consider the vowel sound schwa, whose IPA representation is an upside-down e. The schwa is unique to English but has no single corresponding grapheme--it can be written using any of the vowel letters (a, e, i, o, u, and y.)
much to the consternation of spelling bee contestants everywhere. I got eliminated from the regionals all three times on a schwa sound.
Are there even such things as spelling bees in languages other than English?
Wikipedia says yes--in France and Poland (in French and Polish respectively, one presumes), as well as all over the English-speaking world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_bee
Personally, I think the concept of a spelling bee is most meaningful for languages with defective orthography like English and French. (I don't know where Polish orthography stands in this respect.)
I competed in a spelling bee once, in junior high. It whittled down to two contestants and I was one of the two. But then they threw a word at me which I simply didn't know--bouffant--because I had never had occasion to study ladies' hairstyles. My opponent was (guess what?) a girl, so she got it straight away, and won. I think she later wiped out at the state level.
I still hate the word bouffant.
I think the main reason why UK and US English aren't that different (though they are rather different) compared to Afrikaans/Dutch is because of US English's status of the linga fraca of the world, so UK English has borrowed things of its offspring cousin and gets exposed to US English in films, thus we have a lot less of a problem making ourselves understood in America. Plus most US exposure to UK English comes from more middle-class tourists, who have a lot less of a thick accent, sounding a lot like the generic English accent murdered in films by countless Americans (I find Brits playing Brits in films would use their normal accent, however it sounds worse because of the surrounding American accents. However American actors tend to be awful, and don't sound British when isolated).
For instance, other than words that are specific to UK English, people in stores in CA could generally understand me and my fairly London-based, middle-class, accent, but my welsh uncle, they couldn't. He found it a lot easier to put on an awful US accent, and speak entirely in US mannerisms. But then, being a bit younger, I picked up all the, like, bad American habits. Verbising nouns is a much more common thing in America, as were contractions (though we can't now not use them - we used to say cannot).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjGmmW2HBC4 <-points for understanding Steven Gerrard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pBXf08Nm3Q <-more points for understanding Rob Brydon
Bonus points for being able to spot the accent differences!
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 30, 2010, 02:22:54 PMMeanwhile, the Glasgow accent is one of the very few British accents that are rhotic and I know a few Glaswegians who say they are afraid to open their mouths in England because they fear being misunderstood or ridiculed.
Trawlermen, a TV documentary based on fishing boats from Peterhead, (Northern Scotland) often has subtitles. Partially it's due to loud background noise, but a lot of it is for those in Southern England who can't decipher the thick accent (and there were complaints because of this).
On meeting, at university, someone from Northern Ireland, I (along with a lot of people) someone who I thought was called Dizzy, until, after a few repetitions, I worked out that it was Stacey. Her accent got less thick the longer she stayed away from Norn Iron (that's how they pronounce it in my head), thankfully, or I would have struggled.
Quote from: mightyace on January 30, 2010, 06:03:40 PMAre there even such things as spelling bees in languages other than English?
There aren't spelling bees in English (OK, there's one, which is brand new) - it's in American ;). I guess that, in part, they didn't take off here because it would be even harder, having to put 'u's in things, remembering which licence is licensed to be used when, etc.
Quote from: english si
On meeting, at university, someone from Northern Ireland, I (along with a lot of people) someone who I thought was called Dizzy, until, after a few repetitions, I worked out that it was Stacey. Her accent got less thick the longer she stayed away from Norn Iron (that's how they pronounce it in my head), thankfully, or I would have struggled.
Could it be that you became acclimated to her accent and began having an easier time deciphering/understanding her in general? Or was it more simply because she began to pick up the local mannerisms?
Quote from: english si on January 31, 2010, 04:47:09 AMBut then, being a bit younger, I picked up all the, like, bad American habits. Verbising nouns is a much more common thing in America, as were contractions (though we can't now not use them - we used to say cannot).
It is certainly true that we are more likely to use
like like a Valley Girl, and to convert verbs to nouns, but there are differences of region and register as well. Valley Girl speech mannerisms sound mannered east of the Rocky Mountains, while enthusiastic "verbising" is also a feature of British
Amtssprache (the kind that is used in documents leaked to the media rather than formal government publications).
Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that US and British English started dividing because there was no regular contact. I wonder if colonisation of North America had taken place after the transatlantic telephone cable was laid whether both versions of English would be more similar than they are now? One could also argue that had the internet been around 400 years ago then there would hardly be any difference at all.
When I went to high school, British English was mostly taught. However, I cannot recall that they ever mentioned about the spelling differences and word choice difference between British and US English. Since Dutch TV is loaded with American TV shows and movies, most Dutch write in a blend of British and US English.
To me, British English has some unnatural spellings, like kilometre, metre, centre and litre, since you generally pronounce them different, unless you're trying to speak English with a Russian accent. Maybe it's French influence?
Dutch TV also makes mistakes with this, around 9/11 the WTC was often shown as the World Trade Centre. Since it was in New York, it should've been World Trade Center. It's not in London.
Quote from: Bickendan on January 31, 2010, 05:22:02 AMCould it be that you became acclimated to her accent and began having an easier time deciphering/understanding her in general? Or was it more simply because she began to pick up the local mannerisms?
There was a bit of both, but mostly it was pronunciation and tone changing - not just word use and acclimatisation to her accent. There was still an obvious Irish accent, but letter sounds became a bit more southern English.
Another friend's Welsh accent got more obvious after he had just spoken to his very Welsh-sounding mother - a lot more variety of tone and sing song. Likewise I gain/lose my soft 't's and 'd's depending on who I've been speaking to recently - completely subconsciously. Very rarely, I even drop my long 'a's (which is a sound that non-Southerners can't quite hear right, thinking we're adding 'r's into words). On friend of mine's accent doesn't have a difference between 'f', 'ph' and 'th'. It's incredibly subtle, but you can hear it - his fiancée has been trying to train him though.
Just a couple of notes and observations...
When i took German in high school, my teacher called English "the most illogical language ever invented', because it breaks almost all of it's rules to one degree or another....sometimes in ways that non-native speakers find very confusing...
(Years ago, when i dated a Chinese giel in Toronto, i would occasionally have to pull out "John's Fractured Idiom Dictionary" to explain the meanings of certain words and phrases...we Americans seem to have a real talent for idioms that can confuse then hell out of the world...
I also told her one time *evil smirk* that if i ever moved to Canada to be with her, i would have to spend my life teaching Canadians the proper way to spell 'color', 'neighbor', and other such words that they slip that extra 'u' into (which would usually get me a slap on the arm and a warning that it weould have to be the other way around...if Canadians took over America, they would have to teach us how to spell PROPER English, like 'colour', 'neighbour' and so on..
(a group of us had a running joke about the "Canadian Invasion" of the US via Molson's, Tim Horton's, and LeBlatts....)
But i also read once (pre-Internet days) that in 400 years, Britain and the US would require the use of translators to understand each other...both branches of English would be too divergent to be readily understood by each other
Quote from: ctsignguy on January 31, 2010, 09:35:13 AM
But i also read once (pre-Internet days) that in 400 years, Britain and the US would require the use of translators to understand each other...both branches of English would be too divergent to be readily understood by each other
I imagine the internet has put paid to that since more people than ever now have easy contact with those from other countries.
One language I do find easier in other countries as opposed to its native country is French. The following numbers 70, 80, 90 are much more logical outside of France as Septante, Octante, Nonante. In France it's Soixante-Dix, Quattre-Vingt, Quattre-Vingt-Dix which when a clerk in a store speaks quickly is too much to understand all at once.
I believe they use that in Wallonia (Belgium) and western Switzerland, but not in France. When I had French on high-school, one had to know quatre-vingt-dix-huit and not nonante-huit, which is much easier. Luckily, Spanish is a little less complicated with numbers than French.
French numbers are like math
quatre-vingt-dix-huit = 98
4-20-10-8 means 4 times 20 plus 10 plus 8 = 98.
1998 is spelled "mille neuf cent quatre-vingt-dix-huit" :ded:
Quote from: Chris on January 31, 2010, 08:32:09 AM
To me, British English has some unnatural spellings, like kilometre, metre, centre and litre, since you generally pronounce them different, unless you're trying to speak English with a Russian accent. Maybe it's French influence?
Yeah, those are very much French spellings UK English adopted. Yet, somehow, it seems to work.
People would probably have an easier time learning English if they remembered things on a per-word basis and just forgot about the rules completely.
Funny video I found on YouTube, on correctly pronouncing Worcester, Gloucester and other such names in New England.
Be well,
Bryant
Leicester Square in London: Lester Square, not Leye-sester Square. Wouldn't have guessed that if it hadn't been on the Next Station announcement on the Piccadilly Line.
The "burgh" in Edinburgh is also not pronounced like in Pittsburgh, but like "Edinburu".
Marlborough is pronounced like "Marlbra".
Quote from: Bickendan on January 31, 2010, 09:08:17 PM
Leicester Square in London: Lester Square, not Leye-sester Square. Wouldn't have guessed that if it hadn't been on the Next Station announcement on the Piccadilly Line.
Leic-es-ter, rather than Lei-c-es-ter. Still not exactly phonetic though. (Gloucester Road is similar).
There's worse than Leicester Square - including ones that the announcements get wrong compared to locals: eg Kilburn, Chesham (though Chez-um has nearly died out as a way of saying Chesham, for instance. Only the inhabitants used it and there's been quite a flux - most people say Chess-um or Chesh-um now). Southwark and Greenwich tend to catch tourists out. Theydon Bois would catch the French out as it's like boys, rather than the French way of saying it.
Shrewsbury is Shrews-bry or Shrows-bry, depending where you live in the city.
Loughborough is Luff-bere (though Loughborough Junction in London is different, though I don't know quite how it's said as it's normally said, I'm guessing in jest, as Louggy-brouggyah) - two different ough sounds in one word.
There's also Gillingham (first syllable like the name Jill) in Kent, and Gillingham (first syllable like gill on a fish) in Dorset. While in Surrey and west Kent -wich is said like it is in Greenwich, in east Kent, Sandwich is how you'd think it would be said.
Anyone want to give Beaulieu or Towcester a go? OK, Beaulieu has a lot of French influence in that name, but I'll just say that the French way is wrong.
Quote
Anyone want to give Beaulieu or Towcester a go?
My guess;
Bowl-u and toaster.
Quote from: Chris on February 01, 2010, 10:52:38 AM
Quote
Anyone want to give Beaulieu or Towcester a go?
My guess;
Bowl-u and toaster.
That's excellent Chris, especially as English isn't your first language.
I have another one for someone to have a go at:
Congressbury
Quote from: Truvelo on February 01, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
I have another one for someone to have a go at:
Congressbury
Congs-bree (?)
Be well,
Bryant
Quote from: Bryant5493 on February 01, 2010, 02:38:12 PM
Quote from: Truvelo on February 01, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
I have another one for someone to have a go at:
Congressbury
Congs-bree (?)
Be well,
Bryant
Is this a guess or did you google it?
Those of you who speak the Queen's English can tell me how the corresponding city in England is pronounced.
The largest city near the original Pennsylvania Dutch Country is Lancaster, PA.
IIRC We pronounced in Lan-kast-ur
Is the city in England pronounced Lank-ast-ur?
Quote from: Truvelo on February 01, 2010, 03:19:04 PM
Quote from: Bryant5493 on February 01, 2010, 02:38:12 PM
Quote from: Truvelo on February 01, 2010, 11:43:38 AM
I have another one for someone to have a go at:
Congressbury
Congs-bree (?)
Be well,
Bryant
Is this a guess or did you google it?
I cheated a bit; I wiki'd it. ;-)
Be well,
Bryant
Quote from: mightyace on February 01, 2010, 05:20:15 PM
Those of you who speak the Queen's English can tell me how the corresponding city in England is pronounced.
The largest city near the original Pennsylvania Dutch Country is Lancaster, PA.
IIRC We pronounced in Lan-kast-ur
Is the city in England pronounced Lank-ast-ur?
Most people would say Lan-kast-a
The Lancaster in Ohio is more Lank-is-ter with emphasis on the 'lank'
Another way of saying it is Lan-kas-ta
Quote from: mightyace on February 01, 2010, 05:20:15 PMThe largest city near the original Pennsylvania Dutch Country is Lancaster, PA.
IIRC We pronounced in Lan-kast-ur
Is the city in England pronounced Lank-ast-ur?
A friend of mine back in college who was from York, would correct me when I would call it "Lank-as-ter" and say it is pronounced "Lankas-ter."
Quote from: PAHighways on February 02, 2010, 03:30:35 PM
Quote from: mightyace on February 01, 2010, 05:20:15 PMThe largest city near the original Pennsylvania Dutch Country is Lancaster, PA.
IIRC We pronounced in Lan-kast-ur
Is the city in England pronounced Lank-ast-ur?
A friend of mine back in college who was from York, would correct me when I would call it "Lank-as-ter" and say it is pronounced "Lankas-ter."
Man, one place name, gazillion pronunciations and apparently I picked the most oddball one... :banghead:
______________________________________
On a different vein, from my Ohio days, my church softball team played for a couple of years in Louisville, OH.
Now the locals pronounced it Lou-is-vil as opposed to the city in Kentucky which is commonly referred to as Lou-eee-vil
I would say "lou-eee-vil" as well.
About Indianapolis, where do you put the accent on? like "Indiana-polis" or "India-napolis"?
One that really annoys me is
Lafayette St. in Nashville in which the local insist on pronouncing it LA-fay-et! :pan:
Or the county I live in (Maury) is pronounced Mur-ri or the same as Murray. Maury is supposedly an alternate spelling of Murray. The funny thing is that Tennessee also as a Murray County as well as Maury County.
Well, in the USA there are a lot of town-names directly taken from the old world of the immigrants. English, French, German, Spanish and Dutch townnames often all pronounced differently than the original name in the original country.
Same spelling, different pronunciation... quite common between various areas even within the US. See "New urk", New Jersey versus "New aark", Delaware. Or "Hyoo-stun", Texas versus "How-stun" Street in New York.
Even locally, though, there can be differences in the pronunciation of the same thing. I've always pronounced Schermerhorn Street in Brooklyn "Sker mer horn", but some pronounce it "Sher mer horn". I've always pronounced the Van Wyck Expressway "Van Wick" (like on a candle), but it's not unheard of to hear someone say "Van Wike" (rhymes with "bike"). Everyone in my family has always pronounced Buhre Avenue in my old neighborhood in The Bronx "byoor" (and the recorded announcements on the subway concur with this), but I've heard people say "byoor-ee" and "boor-ee" as well. Supposedly the last one is the most historically correct.
And nobody here in Stamford can agree on whether Culloden Road is pronounced "Cull uh din" or "Cuh low din".
I know I've heard New Orleans pronounced numerous ways.
1) New Oil-ins
2) New Or-leens
3) Naw-lins
4) New Or-lee-ins
Be well,
Bryant
I usually pronounce it "New Or-lens" (quickly), but many Dutchmen indeed say "New Orleeeeeens" like in "jeans".
The French would say "Nouvelle Orléans". There is a major city in France called Orléans, just south of Paris, maybe the name originated there.
Quote from: Bryant5493 on February 07, 2010, 09:00:59 PM
I know I've heard New Orleans pronounced numerous ways.
1) New Oil-ins
2) New Or-leens
3) Naw-lins
4) New Or-lee-ins
Be well,
Bryant
I tend to pronounce New Orleans as "New Oar-lins".
In New York State, there are two ways to pronounce Gouverneur. The town Gouverneur in St. Lawrence County is pronounced "guv-er-noar". There's also a street and a few other place names in New York City that pronounces Gouverneur as "goo-ver-neer".
Gouverneur was named after the Gouverneur Morris, who was a statesman from the early days of the United States of America.
Quote from: Chris on February 08, 2010, 04:04:07 AM
I usually pronounce it "New Or-lens" (quickly), but many Dutchmen indeed say "New Orleeeeeens" like in "jeans".
The French would say "Nouvelle Orléans". There is a major city in France called Orléans, just south of Paris, maybe the name originated there.
In English it is usually "Nuh Or-lins" by the locals, IIRC. However, the French way is very well accepted. In fact, New Orleans was named for exactly that, Chris.