64 replies to this topic

[liuzg150181]

Interesting post, I have never heard this before and I am stunned that it has been over looked. How typically arrogant of white American not to give credit where credit is due.

All you have to do is look at many American city and river names to realize how much influence the Native Americans actually had on our language.

Also I had read somewhere that in fact American English is closer to English during Shakespeare's time,i.e Middle to early Modern English, as compared to British English,and also some words which are now non-existent in British English are still alive in American English,for example crib,pavement and fall(winter).

[William O'Chee]

Just from a perspective of a second speaker who have relentless struggled with IELTS and TOEFL IBt, British accent sounds a bit hard to listen to, while American accent is a bit easier. And then Australian is just...

Now don't be naughty!

Actually, the Australian accent can be difficult to understand, because it is very broad. There are also state and even regional variations of the accent. Queenslanders tend to speak slower than people from the other states. Victorians tend to have a more nasal tone, etc.

The real difficulty people have with Australian speech is the existence of a large local idiom. Not only do we have animals that are found nowhere else in the world - kangaroos, wallabies, bilbies, wombats, goannas, dingos, Tasmanian devils, potoroos, wallaroos, tree kangaroos, taipans, palypus, echidnas, marron, yabbies, witchetty grubs, dugongs, etc - but there are also completely different words.

A tinnie may mean a can of beer or a small aluminium dinghy. Something which is dinki di or fair dinkum, is authentic; if it is bonza, it is excellent. An aboriginal person can be a Murri, a Koori or a blackfella; none of these words in context being offensive. You get the idea.

[peepee]

I think America's ' southern drawl ' is an accent influenced by British-English.

http://en.wikipedia....merican_English

Edited by peepee, 11 September 2008 - 05:02 AM.

[Lu Su]

Now don't be naughty!

Actually, the Australian accent can be difficult to understand, because it is very broad. There are also state and even regional variations of the accent. Queenslanders tend to speak slower than people from the other states. Victorians tend to have a more nasal tone, etc.

The real difficulty people have with Australian speech is the existence of a large local idiom. Not only do we have animals that are found nowhere else in the world - kangaroos, wallabies, bilbies, wombats, goannas, dingos, Tasmanian devils, potoroos, wallaroos, tree kangaroos, taipans, palypus, echidnas, marron, yabbies, witchetty grubs, dugongs, etc - but there are also completely different words.

A tinnie may mean a can of beer or a small aluminium dinghy. Something which is dinki di or fair dinkum, is authentic; if it is bonza, it is excellent. An aboriginal person can be a Murri, a Koori or a blackfella; none of these words in context being offensive. You get the idea.

XD Indeed, don't be naughty Boleslaw. =P I actually have an easier time understanding Australians than the English =P But that's just me. Also, we have a group in America that consistently tries to make themselves sound dumber, less educated, and completely befuddle any concept of the English language. The whole new age rap and hip-hop wannabe gangster culture. I'm honestly not sure what is worse, them or World of Warcraft players and their hideous chatspeak.
Anytime I hear or see either of these used online or in real life - I cringe. I just want to say - 'Would you care to repeat that? In English this time?'

I, of course, have nothing against people who take English as a second language to their own. They are expected to not know it so well. But those previously mentioned obviously have no excuse. =P

[peepee]

The regional accents from all along the East coast are remnants of the accents of the original settlers.

Absolutely accurate ....

America's New England region has distinctive local accents.

Edited by peepee, 11 September 2008 - 12:30 PM.

[fcharton]

Just from a perspective of a second speaker who have relentless struggled with IELTS and TOEFL IBt, British accent sounds a bit hard to listen to, while American accent is a bit easier. And then Australian is just...

Don't know enough about Australian accent, but one thing I noticed when I used to go to big international meetings in large company, where english was the common speech, albeit the native tongue of a minority. Many Americans, when speaking to an international audiences tend to speak very slowly and trying to be as clear as possible (sometimes to the point that you might wonder whether they don't consider you're a bit dumb...). %Many British, on the other hand, will often speak fast and sometimes add some accent or cultural references, just to make sure that something, at least, is lost on the more proficient foreigners... But I've noticed it to be done in all english groups, where Londoners, or Oxbridge alumnis would pepper their speech with cryptic allusions.
Overall, my favourite english accent is the Dutch version, Canadians being close second.

As for the French, we always overdo our natural french accent, since most american (and canadian, and even a couple of british, but always the cutest) girls in those big meetings find it so cute and romantic.

Francois

[kaiselin]

Don't know enough about Australian accent, but one thing I noticed when I used to go to big international meetings in large company, where english was the common speech, albeit the native tongue of a minority. Many Americans, when speaking to an international audiences tend to speak very slowly and trying to be as clear as possible (sometimes to the point that you might wonder whether they don't consider you're a bit dumb...). %Many British, on the other hand, will often speak fast and sometimes add some accent or cultural references, just to make sure that something, at least, is lost on the more proficient foreigners... But I've noticed it to be done in all english groups, where Londoners, or Oxbridge alumnis would pepper their speech with cryptic allusions.
Overall, my favourite english accent is the Dutch version, Canadians being close second.

As for the French, we always overdo our natural french accent, since most american (and canadian, and even a couple of british, but always the cutest) girls in those big meetings find it so cute and romantic.

Francois

I am not particularly fond of any Americans accents. I love Canadian accents, most British and Australian accents.
I agree with Francois that the Brits add colorful references that we Americans do not use. ( so do the Canadians and Australians.)

I have never had the pleasure to spend time with a French man to listen to him, but I had a French Canadian friend who I loved to listen to. I remember he and some friends from Ontario came down to visit and went to a local bar... you should have seen the girls ooooh over him. I know that the French look down on the French Canadian accent as low class, but it still has a nice ring to it if you are not used to hearing French spoken. Now it is not just the french Men that put on the accent for the girls, I have a French friend who turns on and off her accent on different occasions. I love listening to her when she gets agitated and begins speaking more french the English the more upset she gets. I can see why men would be attracted to french women as well It is a very sexy accent. But then any accent is more sexy then American.

[fcharton]

I know that the French look down on the French Canadian accent as low class, but it still has a nice ring to it if you are not used to hearing French spoken.

Actually, I suspect Quebec accent is, for French from France, probably a bit like southern drawl for northern americans. Too much of it is laughed at, but a little of it is considered very cute, but perhaps the same could be said of every accent...

Francois

[Lu Su]

Actually, I suspect Quebec accent is, for French from France, probably a bit like southern drawl for northern americans. Too much of it is laughed at, but a little of it is considered very cute, but perhaps the same could be said of every accent...

Francois

That's very true. Whatever is different from our usual dialect probably sounds strange sometimes.
As far as I know, mine, the 'clean' American accent like Obama uses, was a direct derivative of Irish and Italian families having influence over the original English. The Southern drawl was an influence of old Spanish mixed with original English and I believe something else, and the New England accent I'm not sure of.

[LongMa]

Interesting post, I have never heard this before and I am stunned that it has been over looked. How typically arrogant of white American not to give credit where credit is due.

All you have to do is look at many American city and river names to realize how much influence the Native Americans actually had on our language.

That's highly unlikely. Have you seriously read any U.S. history of colonial times?

THe reason is most Indians were not itegrated into the general white population. Most died from the disease and the majority of those that were left but a handful scattered in small communities were forced to move to places like Oklahoma even further West.

I can not imagine how there would be a critical mass among white Americans of Natives to significantly change their accent. You would have an easier time saying African Slaves changed white dialect than Natives...

American English (Mid-Atlantic dialect) is like English spoken in the South of English with some Irish or Scotch highlights...and a general softening of some of the hard pronouciation of consonants that you have in England...that's about it.

WHat you are saying is like saying Phonecians changed the way Romans spoke Latin or Jews changed the way Roman's spoke Latin or Greeks spoke Greek...highly unlikely.

The fact that many Americans kept the original INdian names from cities and rivers just means that they didn't have a name and likely traders who ventured into Indian territory just adopted the name already used, the same as many settlers adopted the SPanish names for areas in the South West and California...or in Florida. That's not shocking.

There are city names in England that are not of English origin as well, and place names in Spain that are not of SPanish/Latin origin...is that really shocking? Some place names in Japan in Northern Honshu and Hokkaido are definately of Ainu/Emishi origin.

[William O'Chee]

That's highly unlikely. Have you seriously read any U.S. history of colonial times?

THe reason is most Indians were not itegrated into the general white population. Most died from the disease and the majority of those that were left but a handful scattered in small communities were forced to move to places like Oklahoma even further West.

I can not imagine how there would be a critical mass among white Americans of Natives to significantly change their accent. You would have an easier time saying African Slaves changed white dialect than Natives...

American English (Mid-Atlantic dialect) is like English spoken in the South of English with some Irish or Scotch highlights...and a general softening of some of the hard pronouciation of consonants that you have in England...that's about it.

WHat you are saying is like saying Phonecians changed the way Romans spoke Latin or Jews changed the way Roman's spoke Latin or Greeks spoke Greek...highly unlikely.

The fact that many Americans kept the original INdian names from cities and rivers just means that they didn't have a name and likely traders who ventured into Indian territory just adopted the name already used, the same as many settlers adopted the SPanish names for areas in the South West and California...or in Florida. That's not shocking.

There are city names in England that are not of English origin as well, and place names in Spain that are not of SPanish/Latin origin...is that really shocking? Some place names in Japan in Northern Honshu and Hokkaido are definately of Ainu/Emishi origin.

English is a highly adaptive language, and throughout its history, it has shown a great ability to assimilate words from other languages and cultures. That may in fact be part of the reason for its success.

I am not in a position to comment on the adoption of native names in America, but I do have some experience of it in Australia. There are a few points to make.

First, place names cannot be adopted unless there is some degree of vaguely friendly interaction.

Secondly, the more interaction, the more native words are absorbed into English. Obviously, in the case of Australia, where there was a host of new fauna, this was natural.

Thirdly, in Australia there was the acceptance into English of other nouns from aboriginal words. For example, billabong, boomerang, corroboree, gin, bung dilly bag, yakka, yabber, didgeridoo, and possibly jumbuck, are all aboriginal words.

All of this suggests that even where there was violence between Aborigines and white settlers at some times, there was sufficient interaction to allow the transfer of aboriginal words into the new Australian English lexicon.

In Australia, therefore, the aborigines did affect the way we spoke English.

For an interesting short paper on the subject, see:

Aboriginal words in Australian English

Edited by William O'Chee, 12 September 2008 - 11:20 AM.

[Non-Han Nan Ban]

I personally love the New York City accent. Certain slang words in New York and the accent's emphasis on vowels I hear is influenced by a fusion of old Dutch and British English. The tones they use are funny as hell because the accent almost sounds deliberately rude, sarcastic, and intrusive. I just think it's hilarious how they pronounce certain words, like coffee, and how the length of time to pronounce certain words is cut short. In a sense, it's the opposite kind of lazy from a Southern accent, since the latter takes forever to pronounce certain words (i.e. Southern draw), and the New Yorkers see it fit to cut pronunciation time down to a minimum.

Eric (En Rui)

[peepee]

my in-laws all came from rural Missouri and they're "o-r's" were pronounced like "a-r's" which initially surprised me because a word like "forty" came out to be "farty"... and yes, I giggled when my mother-in-law said that. Or some words were pronounced differently like the flower, peony. In the East, it's pronounced... "PEE-uh-nee." In Missouri it was "pee-OH-nee."


Kimchee

I have met some Missouri ' locals ' pronounced the state name ends like ' ra ' not ' ree '

[Lu Su]

That's highly unlikely. Have you seriously read any U.S. history of colonial times?

THe reason is most Indians were not itegrated into the general white population. Most died from the disease and the majority of those that were left but a handful scattered in small communities were forced to move to places like Oklahoma even further West.

I can not imagine how there would be a critical mass among white Americans of Natives to significantly change their accent. You would have an easier time saying African Slaves changed white dialect than Natives...

American English (Mid-Atlantic dialect) is like English spoken in the South of English with some Irish or Scotch highlights...and a general softening of some of the hard pronouciation of consonants that you have in England...that's about it.

WHat you are saying is like saying Phonecians changed the way Romans spoke Latin or Jews changed the way Roman's spoke Latin or Greeks spoke Greek...highly unlikely.

The fact that many Americans kept the original INdian names from cities and rivers just means that they didn't have a name and likely traders who ventured into Indian territory just adopted the name already used, the same as many settlers adopted the SPanish names for areas in the South West and California...or in Florida. That's not shocking.

There are city names in England that are not of English origin as well, and place names in Spain that are not of SPanish/Latin origin...is that really shocking? Some place names in Japan in Northern Honshu and Hokkaido are definately of Ainu/Emishi origin.

To an extent I must disagree. And the proper term is Native Americans, not Indians. There is quite a big difference.

While you have some valid points, it is also obvious that when we first arrived here we did NOT kill Native Americans but tried to work with them and establish harmony. (our first settlers from England) No matter what anyone says it is highly obvious that if we didn't, we would never have made it as far as we did into colonizing. We had to be on good terms with many if not all tribes in the vicinity. There numbers vastly outnumbered ours by tens of thousands irregardless of technological advantages. They could have more then amply organized and dispatched the first settlers, who did come in peace to avoid all the problems of Imperial rule and corruption of England, which ironically, we now have here again today. We must also consider the fact that without their help when we first arrived, we would never have made it, and quite obviously we were little threat to them being a comparatively small number of foreigners with limited supplies in an unknown land.
It was the Spanish and other immigrants allowed to come after us, that began warring with the Native Americans in their typical 'conquer all' mentality which thus began the great war for America. It was hard enough when we arrived to convince them we were not bloodthirsty like Columbus, or the Vikings who actually arrived before him. There was ample reason why both the Vikings and Columbus left. I think the truth of their behavior is obvious when applying logic. And war only begets war, as well as its blind causes.

If you have ever studied deeper into Native American tribes and their languages, you would see that their accents and various aspects of culture have been amalgated into ours despite the more common doctrines on striking differences. They were undeniably the very first foreign influence upon our language. And after studying the accents, It is highly probable they had an early influence to some degree when looking at the speech mannerisms of today. The clean cut tone and throat sounds are a heavy basis which is seen today in the midwest, especially around areas I live (Detroit, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, etc) As I said, while you have some valid points, I cannot help but notice the strong similarities that are apparent and nothing directly disproves their potential influence. Whether it be a considerably small or large one, I would argue that it is indeed there.

Edited by Lu Su, 12 September 2008 - 04:19 PM.

[LongMa]

English is a highly adaptive language, and throughout its history, it has shown a great ability to assimilate words from other languages and cultures. That may in fact be part of the reason for its success.

I am not in a position to comment on the adoption of native names in America, but I do have some experience of it in Australia. There are a few points to make.

First, place names cannot be adopted unless there is some degree of vaguely friendly interaction.

Secondly, the more interaction, the more native words are absorbed into English. Obviously, in the case of Australia, where there was a host of new fauna, this was natural.

Thirdly, in Australia there was the acceptance into English of other nouns from aboriginal words. For example, billabong, boomerang, corroboree, gin, bung dilly bag, yakka, yabber, didgeridoo, and possibly jumbuck, are all aboriginal words.

All of this suggests that even where there was violence between Aborigines and white settlers at some times, there was sufficient interaction to allow the transfer of aboriginal words into the new Australian English lexicon.

In Australia, therefore, the aborigines did affect the way we spoke English.

For an interesting short paper on the subject, see:

Aboriginal words in Australian English

I'm not speaking about the adoption of words, I'm talking accent. Australian accent is just a slight variation of accents already spoken in England.


America English has many words from other languages (I'm going to gues 10-15% of the vocab) but I honestly don't think that had an effect on the way things are pronounced.

I can give you an example.

I lived in Houston, Texas for 2 years. Texas have kept most Spanish place names, but they pronounces them very different from the way a Spanish speaker would.

For example, in Houston there is a street called San Jacinto.

In Spanish it sounds like "Saan Ha-sen-to"

In Texas it is called "San" (like the pronunciation of the "a" in sand) Ja-sen-to.

This is common, Texas rarely pronounce Spanish words properly unless they are Hispanic and many Texas who are not Hispanic don't speak any Spanish, although it was a province of Mexico and many Tejanos (Mexicans who live in Texas since its independence) it has not taught white (or black) Texans much proper Spanish or changed their accent. Texans have a Southern accent that is not the same as Mexican-American accent (Tejanos) in Texas, not even close.