Jump to content

Americanisms


mankytoes

Recommended Posts

Even if research proves that American English is, by some sort of objective linguistic criteria, an offshoot of British English, that doesn't make AE any less valid. If it were to be proven that English originated as a bastard dialect of Frisian that would be historically interesting, but would it mean that English is 'wrong'?

People in the UK naturally feel that AE is incorrect, and people in America sometimes feel the same way about BE. It's just a matter of perspective.

I'm not sure how anyone can really argue that modern AE is merely a branch off of BE.

This article is pretty comprehensive on the subject:

http://www.pbs.org/s...change/ruining/

British and American started to become different when English speakers first set foot on American soil because the colonists found new things to talk about and also because they ceased to talk regularly with the people back home. The colonists changed English in their own unique way, but at the same time speakers in England were changing the language too, only in a different way from that of the colonists. As a result, over time the two varieties became increasingly different, not so radically different that they amounted to different languages, as Italian and French had become a millennium earlier, but different enough to notice.

The differences between American and British are not due to Americans changing from a British standard. American is not corrupt British plus barbarisms. Rather, both American and British evolved in different ways from a common sixteenth-century ancestral standard. Present-day British is no closer to that earlier form than present-day American is. Indeed, in some ways present-day American is more conservative, that is, closer to the common original standard than is present-day British.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pumpkins are also mentioned. The following passage (among others) is why I generally believe GRRM is referring to maize when he talks about corn, since otherwise it would be a redundant list.

"Wheat and corn and barley grew high in its fields, and even in Highgarden the pumpkins were no larger nor the fruit any sweeter than here."

AGoT p. 303 (Talking about the Vale of Arryn)

I understand that much of Westeros is modeled after the British Isles, but I'm unclear why there's been sentiment that New World foods can't exist in Westeros. This is a fantasy world that doesn't need to hew precisely to the real world.

It doesn't hew previously to our world, and it doesn't detract from the story. It's just fun to talk about. And i forgot about the pumpkins.

Great quote btw about wheat, corn, and barley. Question answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This.

There's a difference between Americanisms (linguistic changes in the respective English languages since the Revolution) and merely ragging on Americans for poor grammar. Sure, there are plenty of Americans with pitiful grammar, but having spent a lot of time in the UK, the percentage of semi-illiterate individuals there is just as high, if not greater than in the US. You can go anywhere in the world and find a relatively uneducated portion of the populace to harp on. I feel like it's merely greater exposure of Americans through television and films that creates any such perception of US grammatical deficiency.

I blame the Kardashians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you realize that only makes it worse, right?

How else are the sons and daughters of Albion to know one another? If there were universal pronunciation none would be able to discern the true-born from colonials, or worse, foreigners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How else are the sons and daughters of Albion to know one another? If there were universal pronunciation none would be able to discern the true-born from colonials, or worse, foreigners.

We haven't been colonials since 1776. I can't remember what happened then, could you please remind me? (all in good fun)

Seriously though, if you want to be technical rp is 'correct' and we all speak in various degrees of bastardization. Or chaucer's English. Or the constructed English of the king James Bible. Or any other arbitrary point in the language's development.

Edit spelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We haven't been colonials since 1776. I can't remember what happened then, could you please remind me? (all in good fun)

Seriously though, if you want to be technical rp is 'correct' and we all speak in various degrees of bastardization. Or chaucer's English. Or the constructed English of the king James Bible. Or any other arbitrary point in the language's development.

Edit spelling

I have to agree with you. All language is fluid and changes with time. It doesn't make it incorrect necessarily. Take spanish for another example. The language spoken in Spain is different than that in Mexico. Mostly the same, as BE and AE are mosty the same, but they do have differences too. Same with the various dialects of Spanish spoken in South America. One isn't inherently incorrect while the other is correct, they've just developed differently over the centuries of being separated from the original dialect, where as even the place of origin has changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm from the UK too, and I've only ever heard Americans use the C word to refer to a woman.

I think Trainspotting (both the book and the movie) introduced me to using the C-word to describe males in a variety of contexts (especially Begbe's liberal use of the word). I have tried to change the culture here in the US by using the C-word in similar contexts, but I must say it has thus not worked out very well. :drool:

The word is so stigmatizing here in the US that you really can't use it in conversation without sounding like a misogynist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't they also use 'th' as a substitute for both 'thorn' and 'eth' at the same time as using 'y'? Or did 'th' come later?

Yeah, I believe it was difficult to print 'thorn' and 'eth' with decent clarity, so they kinda got ditched. Plus, I think a lot of folk began to get confused over 'eth's typographic similarities with 'd', and the 'thorn's with 'p'. I'd have to read up on that though, haven't studied it in a while.Also, yeah, I think 'Y' became the equivalent of /th/ (replacing eth/thorn) around this time (Middle-English to Early-Modern English, I believe).

I think the phonetics of 'eth' and 'thorn' were different, albeit subtly, which is probably why 'Y' largely replaced them both, as the language was trying to shrug off a lot of its unnecessary-seeming qualities, enforcing standardisation. The sounds are still notable in Present-Day English, though they no longer possess their own respective morphemes. 'Eth' is the final /th/ sound of "eth", whereas 'thorn' leant more toward the initial-sound of 'thorn'; the difference between the final/initial sound accommodates easier for vowel sounds after the /th/ sound. 'Eth' is more 'lispy' and less voiced, IIRC.

As to people discussing AE and BE: yeah, they're two different languages. They shared a mutual foundation (and still do, with respect to most linguistic areas), but developed apart; thus becoming separate, distinguishable languages of their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see them as two dialects of the same language. They're still much too close to be separate languages.

Depends on how you'd define a language, really. A number of the Romantic languages still share similarities in phonetics, morphology, lexis, and syntax. French and English are quite closely related, particularly in morphology, lexis and phonetics. But you're right - the differences in AE and BE are petty squabbles. I suppose it just boils down to how each country is teaches literacy, which is inherently going to be in accordance with that country's standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only 'Americanism' that took me out of the text was having a character say "Mommy". I can skip over the colors and the grays (despite making me wonder exactly what editors do with their lives now), but mommy is just pronounced so differently to mummy, it always turns into the most annoying whiny American kid voice in my head where my internal monologue had previously been in my own accent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How else are the sons and daughters of Albion to know one another? If there were universal pronunciation none would be able to discern the true-born from colonials, or worse, foreigners.

:stillsick:

I see them as two dialects of the same language. They're still much too close to be separate languages.

This!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only 'Americanism' that took me out of the text was having a character say "Mommy". I can skip over the colors and the grays (despite making me wonder exactly what editors do with their lives now), but mommy is just pronounced so differently to mummy, it always turns into the most annoying whiny American kid voice in my head where my internal monologue had previously been in my own accent.

How has this not come up yet? That's a winner.

now you know how i felt when i watched the show after reading the books in my accent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...