Herb,
This is not the first time (and I hope won't be the last) that I'm
deeply impressed by the range of your understanding and your
willingness to share it with us. I'm sure I speak for many when I say
thanks.>I wanted to add a few comments about standard English within
the fine context you have created. These are, of course, my own quirky
views.
One problem with "edited formal written standard" as presented by
handbooks and manuals of style is that many of those are decades out
of date and many of the "rules" are what Ed Schuster calls
"mythrules", there because they are so hard to slough off, no matter
how dysfunctional they might be. They become ends in themselves and
often distract us from far more important concerns. (Do any of us
still leave our grammar checks on? Are yours as goofy and
unpredictable as mine?)
At what point does writing become "formal?" If a rule isn't followed
by writers we admire, is it a bad rule or are they lesser writers? Are
we to assume that work that breaks those rules hasn't been edited?
Should we assume that it was badly edited, even if the work is hugely
popular and/or critically acclaimed?
I think the word "standard" tends to slant the issue, giving it a
feeling of substance and solidity that won't hold up to close
scrutiny. If we used a word like "norm" or "expectation", I think we
would be better off. You can't ignore expectations, but you're sure
not constrained by them in the same way you are by "standards". Of
course, that would make very clear that the handbooks are deeply
dated. They don't want to describe what successful writers do, but
some sort of antique ideal that was probably never practiced.
Of course, if you're looking for good advice, you probably won't find
it. With very hard to find exceptions, these are the only sentence
level advice in town.
We can continue to judge writing by much higher "standards" than
conformity to these antique ideals. Meanwhile, we could also bring
advice out of the nineteenth and into the twenty-first century.
Craig
The Mary/merry/marry contrast, with the vowels as in maid/med/mad
> respectively, is found mostly in some parts of New England. Most of
> American English has lost it and uses just the vowel in "med" for all
> three. The <c> of "grocery" doesn't actually palatalize; it retroflexes
> by assimilation to the following /r/, which, in AmE, is retroflexed, that
> is, pronounced with the tip of the tongue curled up a bit. This is the
> same thing that happens so /s/ before /r/ at the beginning of words like
> "shrimp". That <sh> sound is different phonetically and articulatorily
> from the <sh> of "ship". (I wrote up a short account of this recently
> for English Today, which you can read at
> http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FENG%2FENG22_01%2FS0266078406001106a.pdf&code=9f078dc7088cf3dd7005a5003ed21b36.)
>
>
>
> Certainly migration route has something to do with the spread of
> particular changes. For example, the ah/aw merger in "cot/caught" started
> in Pittsburgh in the 19th c. and followed the Old National Road (US40/I70)
> west to the Mississippi. All along that route the merge is found in a
> band 50 to 100 miles to the north and south of US40, wider as you get
> farther west. The reason Midwestern English became the basis for
> Broadcast English (I'm avoiding the term "Standard" for reasons I'll get
> to) has to do with immigration patterns and industrialization. Up till
> the Civil War, the US didn't really have anything like a national
> standard, or even strong regional standard dialects. Virginia Tidewater,
> Philadelphia, New York, Boston all had their variants of English and none
> of them was preeminent. However with the Post-Civil War migration from
> Northern and Central Europe many immigrants came in through New York and
> then headed west, following the Old National Road and rail and water
> systems including the Great Lakes. These people tended to bring with them
> a strong regard for education and many of the small Midwestern colleges
> were started by these groups. They adopted and their children learned the
> dialect of the region. With the rapid industrialization of what is now
> the Rust Belt, this region gained political and economic power, and it was
> right in the middle of this that the first licensed radio broadcast
> station started up in Pittsburgh, KDKA, right in the middle of this
> dialect area. Auto and steel industries drew many people from other parts
> of the country, and they too tended to pick up the local accent, or at
> least their children did. This political and economic power led to the
> near standard status of Midwestern English, so that that is the dialect we
> tend to hear most on broadcast media. The prevalence of Southern and
> speakers on outlets like Fox News reflects the increasing economic and
> political might of the South.
>
>
>
> But is there a Standard American? Well, there is an edited formal written
> standard, as described by freshman writing handbooks and manuals of style.
> That, however, is not a spoken dialect. Midwestern English is widely
> considered "neutral" and used as the model against which others are
> compared and from which they are thought to have changed. This is, of
> course, nonsense. Midwestern English is just that one of the many
> dialects of English in this country that happened to get lucky. More and
> more, when one travels to other parts of the country, one hears regional
> standards on radio and TV. Outside of formal writing, it's safe to say,
> at least in sociolinguistic terms, that the US doesn't have a standard
> dialect. It has a variety of regional and social dialects that have
> prestige in their regions.
>
>
>
> Herb
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jean Waldman
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 10:42 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
>
>
>
> Missour-ah is what we say when we are cheering for the Tigers. Otherwise,
> it's Missouri. But we also reduce marry, Mary, and merry to merry. We
> also palatize the c in grocery, making it groshery. My understanding is
> that this has to do with the accent in the part of England from which the
> people came who settled in the various areas of this country.
>
>
>
> Jean Waldman, formerly from Mo.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Paul E. Doniger <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 7:17 PM
>
> Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
>
>
>
> Helene,
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that Missour-ah was how the natives of
> Missouri pronounced their state; correct me if I'm wrong. There's a big
> difference in how we pronounce 'Oregon' here in New England as opposed to
> the "correct" native Oregonian pronunciation.
>
>
>
> Also, in my part of New England (Connecticut), nobody says "Paak thuh
> Kaah;" that's a Bostonian dialect. We do have some of our own unusual
> speech patterns, however. for example, in my area, it's hard to hear the
> difference among the words, merry, marry, and Mary (the all sound like
> merry). I don't think any of these are "vowel shift" issues in the same
> sense as say The Great Vowel shift, but I really don't know for sure.
>
>
>
> Paul D.
>
>
> helene hoover <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> He! rb: Is this NCVS responsible for otherwise standard speakers of
> English
> saying "Missour-ah" for "Missouri"? Along the same lines, how did New
> England get to "Pack the kaa, Mack" for "Park the car, Mark"? Just
> curious.
> Helene
>
>
>
> >From: "Stahlke, Herbert F.W."
> >Reply-To: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> >
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
> >Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:53:45 -0500
> >
> >I wonder of the flush/flesh confusion might not be a feature of the
> >Northern Cities Vowel Shift. I hadn't heard of the NCVS going all the
> way
> >to the west coast, but it has gotten at least as far as Minneapolis and
> St.
> >Louis. If you're not familiar with this sound change, it's a change
> that
> >has taken place over the past century in the major cities around the
> >southern shores of the Great Lakes, extending from about Syracuse west
> >through Buffalo, Erie, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit, Chicago, and
> Milwaukee.
> >From those centers, it has spread out to smaller cities so that it's
> found
> >now in Fort Wayne and Indianapolis as well as in Lansing and Traverse
> City.
> > In this change, which effects quite a number of vowel sounds, the
> vowel
> >/ae/, as in "cat" raises to /E/ ("pet"/) and even gets as high as /i/
> >("seat"), so that the name "Anne" sounds like "Ian". In the process,
> /E/
> >gets moved back to /A/, as in "cut", so that "bed" sounds like "bud".
> This
> >set of shifts would, then, account for "flesh" sounding like "flush",
> but
> >then I don't know if there's any other sign of NCVS hitting Seattle, or
> if,
> >maybe, this speaker came from the Great Lakes states.
> >
> >
> >
> >Herb
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >
> >From: Assembly for the Teaching of En! glish Grammar
> >[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wollin, Edith
> >Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:14 PM
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
> >
> >
> >
> >I've been hearing the same problem with another phrase here in Seattle:
> >"This needs to be flushed out." I'm not even sure if they are really
> saying
> >"fleshed" and it just doesn't sound that way to me or if they know they
> are
> >saying "flushed" and the meaning of "flesh out" has stuck to the whole
> >phrase for them and they don't notice that they are saying almost the
> >opposite of what they mean.
> >
> >
> >
> >This is how we entertain ourselves in meetings!
> >
> >Edith Wollin
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >
> >From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> >[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda DiDesidero
> >Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 9:33 AM
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
> >
> >Thanks for responding, Herb.
> >
> >Yes, the students pronounce blase /blah- ze/. I have heard it is from a
> >rap song that has that refrain, but I'm afraid that I'm not that
> familiar
> >with rap music.
> >
> >
> >
> >What bothers me about the "chock it up to experience" example is that
> the
> >student has no idea what 'chock/chalk' means--the phrase has become a
> >linguistic whole for this student. She has no clue that she is writing
> >about metaphorically making a chalk mark or tally. So this might be
> >isolated BUT the /blah--ze/ is not. I'm actually wondering if this
> could
> >be thought of as onomatopeia.
> >
> >
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >Linda
> >
> >PS I know what you mean about cot/caught and hock/hawk--we lived! in
> Chicago
> >for several years, but now we are back East where all my NE Philly
> >relatives say things like "Yeeah, lez go howme"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Stahlke, Herbert F.W.
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Sent: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:26:43 -0500
> >Subject: Re: Question: Language change and malapropism
> >
> >Interesting questions. Do they pronounce "blasé" with two syllables or
> as
> >if it has a silent e? The chock/chalk confusion may arise from a sound
> >change, the a/aw merger that is found in a band about 100 miles north
> to
> >south from about Pittsburg west to the Mississippi and then everywhere
> west
> >of the Mississippi north of a line from about St. Louis to El Paso.
> These
> >speakers pronounce "cot" and "caught" with the same vowels, which,
> >depending on area, may be either both /a/ or both /aw/. There was until
> >recently a store in here in Muncie called "The Muncie Hawk Shop". At
> first
> >I thought it was a similar confusion of "hawk" and "hock" until I spoke
> to
> >the owner and learned that it was intentional. Because he had an
> earlier
> >felony conviction he could not be bonded and therefore could not get a
> >pawnbroker's license, so instead he opened a buy-sell shop. By spelling
> >the word "hawk", which this area pronounces the same as "hock", he was
> able
> >both to be within the law and to given the impression of functioning as
> a
> >"hock shop".
> >
> >
> >
> >Another widely used form of a different sort is "hone in on" for "home
> in
> >on". The Merriam Webster Dictionary of English Usage dates this usage
> to
> >1978, citing it in a primary campaign speech by George H. W. Bush. I
> have
> >since found it in such places as the New York Times Magazine. I still
> >reject it in student writing, which is, I! fear, every bit as pedantic
> and
> >tendentious as rejecting "most unique".
> >
> >
> >
> >Herb
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >
> >From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> >[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Linda DiDesidero
> >Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:44 AM
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Question: Language change and malapropism
> >
> >
> >
> >The discussion of the broadening of the meaning of 'unique' is
> interesting,
> >but I see a different problem that I might call widespread malapropism.
> >
> >
> >
> >My students often create terms or use them as malapropisms--and these
> may
> >be derived from rap music or these may have their roots in Microsoft
> Word's
> >spell-checker. Does anyone else know anything more about this?
> >
> >
> >
> >One frequently occurring e! xample is the word 'blase' to mean
> "bla-bla-bla"
> >or 'yadayadayada". My students will actually say: "blase blase blase"
> >thinking that it is equivalent to these other terms. So when this
> phrase
> >enters widespread use, can we say that the meaning of 'blase' has
> altered?
> >(even though most students who use it in this context do not know that
> they
> >have altered a meaning; they think they have learned a new word.)
> >
> >
> >
> >The other phenomenon has to do with what we might call homonyms, such
> as:
> >
> >
> >
> >'chock it up to experience'
> >
> >"she was a pre-madonna"
> >
> >
> >
> >While these examples are clearly homonyms--and you think that the
> person
> >had heard the phrase and has just spelled it incorrectly, perhaps with
> the
> >aid of a spell-checker--they really do express concepts that are
> >fundamentally different from the ones they mimic.
> >
> >
> >
> >Chalking it up to experience is different than chocking it up (or
> chucking
> >it up) to experience.
> >
> >
> >
> >A prima donna is a different concept than a pre-Madonna, even though
> they
> >both involve females.
> >
> >
> >
> >Any thoughts?
> >
> >
> >
> >Linda DiDesidero
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> >at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave
> >the list"
> >
> >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/ To join or leave this
> LISTSERV
> >list, please visit the list's web interface at:
> >http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave
> the
> >list"
> >
> >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> >To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> >at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave
> >the list"
> >
> >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> >To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> >at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave
> >the list"
> >
> >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> >To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> >at:
> > http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> >and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> >Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>
>
>
> "If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an
> improbable fiction" (_Twelfth Night_ 3.4.127-128). To join or leave this
> LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave
> the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
