# What dialect of English does your country prefer?



## Pivra

American or English, In Thailand when I was studying there we were tought using American English.


----------



## adverus-1

*It;s funny, cuse while studying here in Iceland I had several teachers, each  one with a different background. Some of them had learned American English and others British English. So I remember my tests were a mixture of both versions of the language. Oral tests were also funny, as they also combianed both accents.*


----------



## MonsieurAquilone

New Zealand is meant to use the British but we often slip into using the American like 'i learned' instead of 'i learnt'.

Purists believe that NZ should be British English.


----------



## Dr. Quizá

It seems nobody cares about that here... I guess the reason is that most English teachers and tourists are British for obvious geographical reasons, but most foreign media come from the USA (although all films and TV series are dubbed) so there is a constant mixing of them. Also, I think the differences between both dialects are minor if we compare American and European Spanish, so it doesn't seem important to take them into consideration unless you want to completely master the language.


----------



## Outsider

I don't think there is a national standard on which dialect to use in public schools. However, I studied in a private school based in the U.K., too. Since their examiners and a few of their teachers were British, they encouraged students to use RP.


----------



## optimistique

In the Netherlands it is obligatory for (secondary) schools to teach its pupils British English, also you have to use British English for your English exam. In university you can choose, but British English is the standard.


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

In Canada we're the fence-sitters in this debate:  our spoken English sounds almost exactly like that of our neighbours in the northern U.S., but our spelling is British.


----------



## Alxmrphi

One thing I can't stand is when you hear words on the telly, and they say it American, I get so annoyed about it, there was one show that talked about "Patriotism" (Pay-tree-ot-ism) and they were saying "Pat-ree-ot-ism" and they sounded like fools. If it was American, fine, that's the way the say that word over there, but in British television, ughh, it was like they wanted to sound foolish.

I've got nothing against the way they say it, it's just when I hear Brit's using certain words, "controversy" is another, I'd cringe if I heard someone say "con_Troversy_", it's "conTroVERsy" here.


----------



## Vanda

Till some time ago most AE. Young people prefer AE due  to -mainly - music and movies, TV. But, nowadays British English is having its way as some people go to England to study, also because most of the academic books sold here now are from British publishing houses, so we can find a mixture of AE and British everywhere.


----------



## love4lingua

Here in England, there is always such a prejudice between those who speak with a 'posh' accent, i.e. RP and those who speak otherwise. I'd say especially from the north, which is where i'm from. Thus it is always the RP which is encouraged, but of course you hear different accents on the tv etc.  You can get judged by what accent you have, it's pathetic. I have more or less a neutral accent, but the English i use is kind of mixed up because my mum's American and so she has taught me some English, whilst the schools have taught the rest. So sometimes, i mix the two up. I didn't even realise that i did this until recently, because i don't know what the difference is.


----------



## cenicienta_87

Here, in Argentina, we learn British English but the students, most of the time, speak with American accent because of the influence of American flims, Tv shows, etc. 
Also, if we want to present an exam (in/at?) a private institute, we do it in British English. 

Please, feel free to correct my English.


----------



## j0ckser

Chaska Ñawi said:
			
		

> In Canada we're the fence-sitters in this debate: our spoken English sounds almost exactly like that of our neighbours in the northern U.S., but our spelling is British.


agreed.  this causes difficulties as some canadians are then viewed as americans when travelling.  one exception to this is newfoundlanders (newfies) whose accent is quite different and distinct.


----------



## Henryk

Here in Germany British English is mainly taught. It's just "European" English, why should they teach American English? The US are far away.


----------



## Korena

Henryk said:
			
		

> Here in Germany British English is mainly taught. It's just "European" English, why should they teach American English? The US are far away.


 
Well, here in America, in lots of our high schools these days, students are required to take a foreign language class in order to graduate. We learn languages like French, Portugese, German, etc. even though those countries are far away! So, just because you live far away from somewhere, doesn't mean that you shouldn't learn the language! 

-Korena


----------



## Henryk

Well, I didn't want to say AE is useless to us. I just meant that it's better to teach BE as it's closer to Germany. More German companies cooperate with British ones due to that fact (for example). I couldn't imagine what'd be if the USA were in Europe. Which persuasive advantages does AE have and why should one teach AE instead of BE in Europe? Finally, the politicians determine it.

At my school (economy) they teach only BE, when I took an AE word I was told that I shouldn't use it in my tests in any case. I'd certainly have some problems if I were formerly taught AE grammar.

In the end we also understand you so the difference isn't that big.


----------



## Korena

Henryk said:
			
		

> In the end we also understand you so the difference isn't that big.


 
That's true!  

-Korena


----------



## América

Here in Bolivia we learn mostly American English because the better place for learning it teaches that kind of English. Adittionally, the center that used to teach British went to bunckrupcy so we don't have to many choises, here.


----------



## Markus

I think that in France it is usually BE. I can't tell the difference though, their French accents far outweigh whatever dialect of English they have learned.  Most people I have met who have _very _good accents speak AE, but that is because they spent time in the USA.


----------



## Mei

Hi,

Here we learn the BE in the school but I prefer the AE because I dunno why I understand them better... Maybe it's music's fault... 

Mei


----------



## AnaBouso

Maybe it's a bit more common teaching British English at schools, but there's no real standard. In my case, I've changed three times my accent, I started with a sort of oxbridge accent, then, influenced by rock bands, changed to american and, finally, after living one year in Coventry, I have a very weird kind of brummie accent. I tend to imitate the accent I listen to more often, so I don't wanna know what comes next.

Kind regards,

ANA


----------



## gato2

I think in Spain we prefer BE and I prefer it too because I find the accent easier to understand and imitate.


----------



## love4lingua

j0ckser said:
			
		

> this causes difficulties as some canadians are then viewed as americans when travelling


 
I made the mistake of thinking a Canadian was an American due to the extreme similarity in accents. That person gave me the advice that i should always ask 'What part of North America are you from?' I have asked that a few times, but i always get a weird look, like it's obvious. It really is so hard to tell, so please don't take it to heart


----------



## diegodbs

British accent. That's what I learned and most people I know did the same.
There are more British teachers here than teachers from the US. You only need two hours to come from London to Madrid so that's the accent I'm used to. I can't imitate an American accent and sometimes I find it hard to understand.


----------



## Ёж!

I never attended any English classes in schools, but as far as I know they usually put maps of England and pictures of London on the walls, and their reading materials concern mostly Britain. Still, I think we just don't distinguish. Or maybe it's only I who don't. As for the spoken accent, it is Russian. The matter is, we don't pay much attention to foreign languages in common schools. As for what they have in specialised schools, I don't know. They don't seem to be popular, anyway.


----------



## funnyhat

Henryk said:


> At my school (economy) they teach only BE, when I took an AE word I was told that I shouldn't use it in my tests in any case.



This seems very odd to me.  I can understand choosing one English standard as the general reference, but to actually _forbid_ people from using a word from the other standard seems excessive.  As far as I'm concerned, if a kid in my class wants to call his pants "trousers," hey, it's all good.


----------



## merquiades

In France 20 years ago people learned only British English, the books were skewed to the UK culture, teachers would scream if you used anything American sounding and anything  Anglophone culture outside Britain was pretty much ignored in classes.  There are vestiges of that still.  The old teachers, old methods, old ideas are still out there.  Nowadays, American English is gaining year by year.  Most new books try to be 50-50.   But the "best" students (those who don't speak with strong French accents and learn/retain their lessons) sound to me like they have picked up some American English because it is the language of popular culture (series, films, computer games, etc.)


----------



## germanbz

The standard English accent taught in Spain has been BE. In '70s teachers tended to use a standard RP English and tapes and listenings in books used to use that same accent known in those days more commonly as "bbc English or Queen's English".

Nowadays students books have been updated. One can listen several different accents and different formal and informal ways of speaking, but as the most of student books come from UK as well as English teachers, the BE still is absolutely predominant.

In other hand, most of us, Spaniards  generations of students of English, have grown with the "urban legend" that AE was almost "unintelligibly" but nowadays I think I can understand  a movie or tv series in AE much better than in BE. I  mean I found a great difference between standand BE and "street fast speaking",
I think that at the end and for people who usually complete its English classes watching films, documentaries or series in AE, at last the accent is a standard English accent but softer, and possibly a bit more rhotic.

About those who say that can adquire an accent just listening music, well, I have my doubts  that is possible but if they say so...


----------



## dreamlike

Well, it's a bit difficult to answer a question such as this when it comes to Poland, because in our schools little, if any, attention is paid to teaching correct pronunciation, save maybe for a few notable exceptions... the teachers just correct the more glaring errors, but overall they don't seem to care about how their pupils sound, which results in Polish people speaking with a dire strong accent. Throughout my entire non-academic education, not one time have I learnt anything about English sounds. That all being said, it is BrE that is preferable, judging by the spelling and student books they use, and oh... the design of classrooms is a bit telling, too.

At universities, I'm talking English studies here, there's sometimes a choice between the GA and the RP, but usually only the latter is taught, as is the case with two major universities in my home town.


----------



## Sepia

When I speak BE a lot of people take me for a Londoner, so that obviously has become my subcoonscious favourite. However, I really could fall in love with Maltese English.

When I speak with North Americans it is probably somewhere between "General American" and Canadian English. Most people locate me somewhere on the East Coast, which is fine with me. Must be due to media influence. All my Canadian relatives live in B.C.


----------



## Ёж!

dreamlike said:


> Well, it's a bit difficult to answer a question such as this when it comes to Poland, because in our schools little, if any, attention is paid to teaching correct pronunciation, save maybe for a few notable exceptions... the teachers just correct the more glaring errors, but overall they don't seem to care about how their pupils sound, which results in Polish people speaking with a dire strong accent.


I guess, exactly the same in Russia. At least, it was exactly so in my French classes...


----------



## ewie

optimistique in 2006 said:


> In the Netherlands it is obligatory for (secondary) schools to teach its pupils British English, also you have to use British English for your English exam.


Wow, I'm amazed to read that.  I wonder if it's still the case in 2013 ... ?


love4lingua said:


> That person gave me the advice that I should always ask 'What part of North America are you from?'


I was always given the advice, "Always ask 'What part of Canada are you from?' ~ Americans don't mind being mistaken for Canadians, and Canadians will always be flattered _not_ to be mistaken for Americans."  (Mind you, this was my grandmother giving this advice.  She was Canadian)


----------



## Wordsmyth

ewie said:


> _ [...] _Americans don't mind being mistaken for Canadians _ [...]
> _(Mind you, this was my grandmother giving this advice.  She was Canadian)


 ... and obviously had never seen South Park! 


Sepia said:


> _ [...] _ I really could fall in love with Maltese English. _ [...]_


 You make a good point there, Sepia. This thread, as is often the case, revolves around BrE and AmE (with CanE dropping in for a guest appearance). But there are of course many other distinct versions of English in the numerous countries that have English as their official language (or one of them): versions that vary not only in accent, but also in vocabulary, grammar and syntax — and Maltese English is indeed one of them.

Ws


----------



## ewie

Wordsmyth said:


> ... and obviously had never seen South Park!


♪ _Blame Canada!_ ♫

(I'm surprised they don't teach Gibraltarian English in Spain.  joke)


----------



## dreamlike

Wordsmyth said:


> ... and obviously had never seen South Park!
> You make a good point there, Sepia. This thread, as is often the case, revolves around BrE and AmE (with CanE dropping in for a guest appearance).


And rightly so, I think. Please note that this is not a thread about the multitude of English accents, rather it treats of which variety of English is taught at schools (or is otherwise preferable) in a given country, and I can hardly imagine Maltese English or Caribbean English being taught taught widely in any country in the world...


----------



## merquiades

ewie said:


> I was always given the advice, "Always ask 'What part of Canada are you from?' ~ Americans don't mind being mistaken for Canadians, and Canadians will always be flattered _not_ to be mistaken for Americans."  (Mind you, this was my grandmother giving this advice.  She was Canadian)



Just say plain old "Where are you from?"  I'm not sure an American would be flattered to be mistaken for a Canadian, or the other way around either.  You really can't tell Americans and Canadians apart?  It's so obvious to me.  Well to be fair... a lot of Americans can't tell English, Welsh and Scottish apart either.


----------



## Wordsmyth

dreamlike said:


> And rightly so, I think. Please note that this is not a thread about the multitude of English accents _[...]_


 And please note that I wasn't referring to accents, but to varieties of English that vary "in vocabulary, grammar and syntax" (see my #"32). The thread title refers to dialect, not accent. 


dreamlike said:


> _[...]_  rather it treats of which variety of English is taught at schools (or is otherwise preferable) in a given country, _[...]_


 The original OP's question was (and the thread title is) "What dialect of English does your country prefer?" Whilst "your country" may well include education authorities, it also includes the entire population, as you acknowledged with your "or is otherwise preferable".  


dreamlike said:


> _[...]_ I can hardly imagine Maltese English or Caribbean English being taught taught widely in any country in the world...


 I've no idea whether Maltese English is taught in Maltese schools (though it probably is if the teachers are Maltese), but I'm sure that most of the native Maltese population prefer it. Certainly the majority of the 1200 million Indian population prefer Indian English. And so on and so on.

So should the discussion rightly be limited to BrE and AmE? I think not.

Ws


----------



## merquiades

Can we really talk about a Maltese English?  I know it is an official language on the island and most of the people probably speak it extremely well but as far as I know the native language is Maltese.  The kind of English they speak would be influenced by their mother tongue and foreign sounding.  I say this but I admit never actually having heard any Maltese speaking before.


----------



## dreamlike

Wordsmyth said:


> I've no idea whether Maltese English is taught in Maltese schools (though it probably is if the teachers are Maltese), but I'm sure that most of the native Maltese population prefer it. Certainly the majority of the 1200 million Indian population prefer Indian English. And so on and so on.



I thought, perhaps mistakenly, that in this thread we were supposed to discuss which variety of English is preferable in a given _non-English-speaking_ country, and indeed such were most of the contributions. That Scottish English is hugely preferred (compared to other dialects of English) in Scotland, and similarly Indian English in India, AuE in Australia, NzE in New Zeland, Jamaican English in Jamaica, or, for that matter, Brunei English in Brunei, is quite obvious. I'm sure that no person from, say, Australia, would chime in with a striking discovery that hey, Australia prefers AuE. That's why I thought that non-English-speaking countries were meant. 

Never mind, you may well disregard my posts, what do I know.... and who am I to say that the discussion should be limited to BrE and AmE -- but, understandably, it is indeed these two variaties that are taught in non-English-speaking countries. I agree with your conclusion, though, we can discuss what we want, it's 'Cultural Discussion forum' after all and the rules are more lax here.


----------



## funnyhat

ewie said:


> I was always given the advice, "Always ask 'What part of Canada are you from?' ~ *Americans don't mind being mistaken for Canadians*, and Canadians will always be flattered _not_ to be mistaken for Americans."  (Mind you, this was my grandmother giving this advice.  She was Canadian)



Hmmm . . . my relatives in Minnesota and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan would disagree.  People from other parts of the U.S. hear their accent and often think they're Canadian, which annoys them a lot. 

I'm not sure why it's necessary to make any assumptions at all about a person's home country.  Why not just simply ask "Where are you from?"


----------



## Wordsmyth

dreamlike said:


> I thought, perhaps mistakenly, that in this thread we were supposed to discuss which variety of English is preferable in a given _non-English-speaking_ country, and indeed such were most of the contributions.


 OK dreamlike, with that assumption I agree that BrE and AmE would be the prime contenders. I just took the OP's question at face value. And yes, it would be fatuous to ask Scots, New Zealanders or Australians which variant of English they prefer, but then those are  countries where English is the only language for the large majority of the population.

 However it's not quite the same in countries that have English as an official or major language alongside another national language. I have known both Maltese and Indian people who strive to drop the lexical and grammatical characteristics of their local variety of English in favour of BrE, because they see it as more 'cultured' or more internationally acceptable (their view, not mine!). So their answers to the question about preference might not be quite so predictable.



merquiades said:


> Can we really talk about a Maltese English?  I know it is an official language on the island and most of the people probably speak it extremely well but as far as I know the native language is Maltese.  The kind of English they speak would be influenced by their mother tongue and foreign sounding.  I say this but I admit never actually having heard any Maltese speaking before.


 We really can talk about a Maltese English, merq — at least as much as we can talk about American English or British English. Most Maltese are bilingual from a very young age, and to the best of my knowledge all secondary and higher education in Malta is in English; so it's not the same situation as, say, a native French speaker learning English as a second language and thus sounding "foreign". For many Maltese people, English is as much a 'mother tongue' as Maltese (national identity issues aside).

Actually Maltese English is very little influenced by the Semitic roots of the Maltese language, but does have features derived from the more recent influence of Italian. I used to do quite a bit of business in Malta, and I often noticed expressions and constructions that echoed Romance language forms, where they wouldn't in 'standard' English. But they're established features of Maltese English, not 'foreigner mistakes'.

Ws


----------



## dreamlike

I, on the other hand, was clearly reading too much into the OP's question, so we may well pretend I haven't produced the last two posts. 



Wordsmyth said:


> Most Maltese are bilingual from a very young age, and to the best of my knowledge all secondary and higher education in Malta is in English; so it's not the same situation as, say, a native French speaker learning English as a second language and thus sounding "foreign".


And yet, they do sound foreign. I am watching some YT videos at the moment, and regular Maltese people speak with a very strong distinctive accent. I am told by Wikipedia that it is not uncommon for some well-educated people with a high social status to use impeccable RP, though. Even more interesting is the phenonomenon of code-switching -- throwing in some English words and phrases to an otherwise Maltese utterance, or the other way around. It's a good thing that you brought Maltese English up, it's certainly an interesting issue, thank you.


----------



## merquiades

I checked out Maltese television.  It sounds like a mixture of Arabic, English and Italian.  Seriously, I'd say their English is excellent but I would never consider them native speakers.  Actually I wouldn't consider Indians native speakers either.  There is something that sounds off yet I'm very aware that many people started English at 5 and as such may often times know more about grammar than the British and know more synonyms, expressions, proverbs than Americans.  I'd put them in the same category as Dutch speakers:  bilingual or close to bilingual but not native.
I know this is awkward.  People from British commonwealth countries where English is official are often forced to take ESL classes in the US when they arrive for their studies, and it's a sore spot for them.  Even worse when their teachers fail them!
Bringing this back around to topic, I don't think anywhere do they teach a norm that isn't British, Irish, American, Canadian, Australian....  I would be surprised if people in Cameroon or Senegal (or even Nigerians) learn say Nigerian English, or Nigerianized Engllish.  All these varieties exist on microsoft spell check (English Sri Lanka, English Botswana...) so maybe they have become standard.


----------



## tonyspeed

dreamlike said:


> That Scottish English is hugely preferred (compared to other dialects of English) in Scotland, and similarly Indian English in India, AuE in Australia, NzE in New Zeland, Jamaican English in Jamaica, or, for that matter, Brunei English in Brunei, is quite obvious.



In the former days, British English was often prefered to Jamaican English in Jamaica. In modern times American English is becoming the prestige pronunciation. You will find a range of pronunciations in Jamaica, most of which carry higher prestige than Jamaican English in certain circles. So it's not as obvious as one would think.


----------



## Wordsmyth

On the question of Maltese English sounding "foreign" (and I guess, dl and merq, you're referring essentially to accent rather than other dialect aspects), it all depends on your reference base. I'm sure that a BrE speaker who hadn't been acclimatised to AmE through films and TV shows would find AmE speakers very foreign-sounding; and vice versa for an American hearing BrE for the first time. 

It's not surprising that Maltese English speech has tones of Arabic, English and Italian, since those have been the three biggest language influences in Malta throughout history. But then certain New Yorkers' speech has clearly identifiable Italian tones, while others owe their accent and speech patterns to Yiddish — this doesn't mean they can't be considered as native speakers.

I really can't go along with the Dutch analogy. Their first language is Dutch; they learn English as a foreign language. They often achieve an excellent standard, but English is in no way their native language. The English they learn is most likely to be essentially BrE or AmE. There's no such thing as Dutch English with its own specificities of vocabulary, grammar, syntax.

Now take the Indian situation. India has 22 recognised regional languages (and hundreds of distinct dialects), but two official national languages: Standard Hindi and English. About 60% of the population don't speak Hindi, and of those who do only a minority speak Standard Hindi. English is therefore widely used as the common language. In many Indian families, two languages are spoken day-to-day: English and the local Indian language (Urdu, Tamil, Punjabi, Gujarati, etc, etc, ...) — they grow up learning the two languages side by side (from birth, not just from age 5), so English is as much a native tongue as the other one ... and the English they speak is Indian English. It may vary across regions or social groups, but there are core characteristics in common. Finally, I have known a number of Indians (born, bred and living in India) whose only fluent language is English — try telling them they're not native speakers! 

None of that suggests that Indians are in the same category as the Dutch. 

I'm with you on your last point, merq, though I'd take out the 'maybe'. The reason that all those variants of English appear in Microsoft's language listings, and in many other sources, is indeed that they are distinct, established varieties of English.

Dreamlike, I've always found the 'code switching' you mentioned fascinating: some Maltese refer to the result as Maltlish — much as the same phenomenon in the Philippines is called Taglish (Tagalog/English).

Ws


----------



## dreamlike

tonyspeed said:


> In the former days, British English was often prefered to Jamaican English in Jamaica. In modern times American English is becoming the prestige pronunciation. You will find a range of pronunciations in Jamaica, most of which carry higher prestige than Jamaican English in certain circles. So it's not as obvious as one would think.



The same is the case with Maltese and Indian people, as suggested by Wordsmyth in his #40, but I'm yet to come across a video in which a Jamaican person uses pronunciation other than Jamaican English, which is of course readily identifiable. What do you mean by certain circles? I gather that BrE/AmE is not used by people from all walks of life, rather by the selected few like professors or some other well-educated people?


----------



## tonyspeed

dreamlike said:


> The same is the case with Maltese and Indian people, as suggested by Wordsmyth in his #40, but I'm yet to come across a video in which a Jamaican person uses pronunciation other than Jamaican English, which is of course readily identifiable. What do you mean by certain circles? I gather that BrE/AmE is not used by people from all walks of life, rather by the selected few like professors or some other well-educated people?



By people who want to seem rich.

For completeness sake,  I should also make it clear that Jamaican English is different from Jamaican Creole. Most of the videos one can find on the internet will contain Jamaican Creole, not Jamaican English. Jamaican Creole is the language of our entertainment, as opposed to Jamaican English which is the language of business and education.


----------



## Wordsmyth

dreamlike said:


> _[...] _but I'm yet to come across a video in which a Jamaican person uses pronunciation other than Jamaican English, which is of course readily identifiable. _[...] _


 I don't want to flog a dead horse, but let's not forget that the distinct varieties of English aren't just a question of accent, but of vocabulary, spelling and grammatical construction. 

I had a good demonstration of the vocabulary aspect during my first visit to Jamaica: I went to lunch with two business contacts, both having a pretty distinct Jamaican accent (well they would, they were Jamaican!). The English of one of them was indistinguishable from BrE (accent aside); the other one used a lot of local words and expressions (and sentences liberally sprinkled with "man"). He wasn't speaking patois, but the first guy still had to translate a number of things for me.

Ws


----------



## Schem

The English taught in public schools here is thoroughly British. What the people speak and how English is used commercially (and probably in most private schools) is mostly American-based, however.


----------



## Mackinder

I think US English.


----------



## Ёж!

dreamlike said:


> Well, it's a bit difficult to answer a question such as this when it comes to Poland, because in our schools little, if any, attention is paid to teaching correct pronunciation, save maybe for a few notable exceptions... the teachers just correct the more glaring errors, but overall they don't seem to care about how their pupils sound, which results in Polish people speaking with a dire strong accent.


By the way, I don't know how many people in my country think the same, but I really don't find this bad at all; to me, writing and especially reading are certainly more important than talking... Probably not few, because language education in Russia _is_ written-text based.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Ёж! said:


> _[...]_ to me, writing and especially reading are certainly more important than talking _[...]_


 Tends to slow business meetings down a bit, though ... and you probably wouldn't get far chatting someone up at a party! 

Ws


----------



## dreamlike

tonyspeed said:


> For completeness sake, I should also make it clear that Jamaican English is different from Jamaican Creole. Most of the videos one can find on the internet will contain Jamaican Creole, not Jamaican English. Jamaican Creole is the language of our entertainment, as opposed to Jamaican English which is the language of business and education.


How are these different from each other when it comes to pronunciation? Which of these dialects is more distant from, say, standard British English? Let's take Usain Bolt, does he use Jamaican English or Jamaican Creole?



Ёж! said:


> By the way, I don't know how many people in my country think the same, but I really don't find this bad at all; to me, writing and especially reading are certainly more important than talking... Probably not few, because language education in Russia _is_ written-text based.


It's a question of priortities I guess, and good pronunciation skills rank high on my list of priorities, and are socially desirable. I've been told that, in the UK, the better your accent the higher your chances of getting a job in, say, the office. I don't mind that terribly, though, as long as the teachers don't mislead the pupils by exposing them to an incorrect pronunciation, as it is often the case in Poland, e.g. pronouncing the word 'comfortable' as 'ˈkʌmfəteɪbl'. 



Wordsmyth said:


> I don't want to flog a dead horse, but let's not forget that the distinct varieties of English aren't just a question of accent, but of vocabulary, spelling and grammatical construction.


Yes, of course, but the last three factors are not as readily visible from the comfort of my own home, I'd have to talk to such individuals, which I don't have the opportunity to do. I have to make do with YT videos. There are a lot of English-speaking foreigners in my city, but sadly very few of them speak some exotic dialects of English, and I don't travel extensively, at least for now.


----------



## tonyspeed

dreamlike said:


> How are these different from each other when it comes to pronunciation? Which of these dialects is more distant from, say, standard British English? Let's take Usain Bolt, does he use Jamaican English or Jamaican Creole?





dreamlike said:


> How are these different from each other when  it comes to pronunciation? Which of these dialects is more distant from,  say, standard British English? Let's take Usain Bolt, does he use  Jamaican English or Jamaican Creole?



Jamaican Creole aka Patois is, according to grammaticians, not a  dialect but another language. However, politically speaking, it is  considered a dialect. 

Pronunciation in Jamaica is a difficult  question. To my ears there is a lot of variation depending on where one  comes from on the island, one's background, and one's exposure to cable  TV. We naturally have a propensity to changing our accent to other  varieties of English accent; something we call "twanging". So it is hard  for me to give categorical answers. If one talks about possibilities  (because Jamaican language is a linguistic spectrum of sorts) Jamaican creole accent has  the potential to be much further from British English; however, even the  standard Kingstonian Jamaican English of yesteryear shares little in  common with British or American English in terms of vowel pronunciation.  It is, however, closer to certain Irish varieties of English,  especially from the Cork area.

To me, Usain Bolt does not speak  with a Jamaican English accent at all. He is trying to use an American  Accent. There are actually very few markers of Jamaican English in his  speech in recent interviews. My theory is that he learned how to speak  English by association with other American runners. Usain bolt is from  the heartland of Jamaican Creole, so he probably spoke very little  English growing up. His natural accent can be found on youtube if you  search for "usain bolt natural accent".

To me, Sean Paul's 2002  interviews with British interviewers are characteristic of a typical Kingstonian Jamaican English  accent. In 2002, he had very little association with Americans;  therefore, his accent had not changed much for interviews.


----------



## Wordsmyth

dreamlike said:


> _[...]_ Yes, of course, but the last three factors are not as readily visible from the comfort of my own home, I'd have to talk to such individuals, which I don't have the opportunity to do. I have to make do with YT videos.  _[...]_


 I take your point, dreamlike. You could see those characteristics in written texts, but finding such things on the web isn't easy. 

I won't presume to give examples of the Jamaican English I've encountered, as tony might well tell me they're "the standard Kingstonian Jamaican English of yesteryear".
But a few examples of the different vocabulary and syntax of, for instance, Irish English can be found here and here. And you're right: to appreciate those differences effectively, you have to spend some time in the company of Irish people (which, I'm glad to say, I often do).

Ws


----------



## dreamlike

Thanks, Tony, for your detailed answer. Who would've thought that pronunciation in Jamaica is such a complex issue! Highly interesting. While doing a search on YT, I came across an unusual (for me) video. Look for 'My White Jamaican Dad' -- I must say that Jamaican English (I'm pretty sure it's not Jamaican Creole-- I read up on it a bit and it would probably be completely incomprehensible to me, which the guy in the video is not) coming from him sounds fabulous! 

Thanks, WS. As interesting as it may be, reading about how Irish English or Scottish English is different from standard English is not half as fun as socializing with its speakers, which, going forward p), I hope I will have a chance to do!


----------



## Wordsmyth

dreamlike said:


> _ [...] _which, going forward p) _ [...] _


 Ouch!  ... But yes, I totally agree with your sentiment.

Ws


----------



## tonyspeed

dreamlike said:


> Thanks, Tony, for your detailed answer. Who would've thought that pronunciation in Jamaica is such a complex issue! Highly interesting. While doing a search on YT, I came across an unusual (for me) video. Look for 'My White Jamaican Dad' -- I must say that Jamaican English (I'm pretty sure it's not Jamaican Creole-- I read up on it a bit and it would probably be completely incomprehensible to me, which the guy in the video is not) coming from him sounds fabulous!
> 
> Thanks, WS. As interesting as it may be, reading about how Irish English or Scottish English is different from standard English is not half as fun as socializing with its speakers, which, going forward p), I hope I will have a chance to do!





That is a simple form of Jamaican Creole he is speaking, which combines both Jamaican creole grammar forms and English forms. It is the form closer to English. Jamaican English is almost identical to British English with a few borrowed Jamaicanisms from Jamaican Creole. If the grammar is different AT ALL from standard British English it is being influenced by Jamaican Creole. If you want to hear Jamaican English look up "Usain Bolt gives advice to Manchester United." That is how Jamaican English sounds.

 The white Jamaican father's accent to me sounds strange. I'm going to assume that his great-grand/grand parents must have been German immigrants. It is not a "standard" Jamaican accent. Many ethnic groups in Jamaica also preserve their own accents as well, including Chinese and Indian.


----------



## Stoggler

funnyhat said:


> This seems very odd to me.  I can understand choosing one English standard as the general reference, but to actually _forbid_ people from using a word from the other standard seems excessive.  As far as I'm concerned, if a kid in my class wants to call his pants "trousers," hey, it's all good.



That seems odd to me as well, but I can recall reading on these very forums not too long about ago some educational institutions in the US failing native English speakers who submit work with British spellings and grammar.


----------



## Einstein

Wordsmyth said:


> I don't want to flog a dead horse, but let's not forget that the distinct varieties of English aren't just a question of accent, but of vocabulary, spelling and grammatical construction.


We'll have to open a thread some time (I don't have time now) to discuss at what point a regional accent (and "regional" can refer to a region of the world) becomes a dialect and at what point a dialect becomes another language.
We all know what black, white and grey mean, but there can be disagreement about where black becomes dark grey and where light grey becomes white.
If an American speaks to me in standard American, which is perfectly comprehensible with just a few differences in grammar and word use, I can tell where he/she comes from but don't consider that to be a dialect. A dialect to me is something that is recognisably English but with a certain difficulty in understanding even for other native speakers.
I'll start a thread when I have time if someone else doesn't beat me to it.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Hi Einstein,

I think the question of what we understand by dialect is pertinent in this thread, since the title is "What dialect ...". So just a couple of comments:


Einstein said:


> _[...] _at what point a regional accent (and "regional" can refer to a region of the world) becomes a dialect and at what point a dialect becomes another language. _[...] _


 "At what point a dialect becomes another language" is something that linguists have been debating for a long time, without reaching agreement — which is why the question "How many languages are there in the world?" never has a simple answer. As for the difference between accent and dialect, that's easier: accent is only one element of dialect; dialect also includes vocabulary and grammar. Accent is only spoken; dialect may be spoken and written.


Einstein said:


> _[...] _If an American speaks to me in standard American, which is perfectly comprehensible with just a few differences in grammar and word use, I can tell where he/she comes from but don't consider that to be a dialect. A dialect to me is something that is recognisably English but with a certain difficulty in understanding even for other native speakers. _[...] _


Standard American isn't a good example. Each major English-speaking country has a formally standardised variant of English: so it's standard for that country. Dialects are then variants of those standards. 

But whether we're talking standard varieties or dialects, I don't think we can apply 'difficulty in understanding' as a criterion to define a form of language, because it depends on who's doing the understanding. If we do use that criterion, a dialect is a dialect only for those who don't know it! But that isn't so: a Geordie speaker (assuming he's aware of standard BrE) recognises that he's speaking a dialect, and is probably proud of it. The same principle applies to standard American: Americans understand it; you understand it because you've become familiar with the differences (relative to your brand of BrE). But someone hearing those differences for the first time would have a certain difficulty in understanding it. 

As for the "few differences in _[grammar and]_ word use", I'm not so sure about "few". I have a list of AE/BE vocabulary differences I've jotted down (as they arise) to help non-native English speakers where I work: I'm already up to more than 130 everyday words and expressions — and I've no doubt there are loads more.

Ws


----------



## Einstein

As I said, I think this is really a subject for another thread, so just two brief points:


Wordsmyth said:


> Standard American isn't a good example. Each major English-speaking country has a formally standardised variant of English: so it's standard for that country. Dialects are then variants of those standards.


I agree, but the original questioner did consider American English as a dialect; I was answering that. In fact I think the thread is wrongly named for this reason.


Wordsmyth said:


> As for the "few differences in _[grammar and]_ word use", I'm not so sure about "few". I have a list of AE/BE vocabulary differences I've jotted down (as they arise) to help non-native English speakers where I work: I'm already up to more than 130 everyday words and expressions — and I've no doubt there are loads more.
> Ws


130 is a very small part of the total!


----------



## Wordsmyth

Einstein said:


> _[...] _I agree, but the original questioner did consider American English as a dialect; I was answering that. In fact I think the thread is wrongly named for this reason. _[...]_


 Good point.


Einstein said:


> _[...] _130 is a very small part of the total!


 I read somewhere that only about a thousand words are used in most people's everyday speech.

Ws


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

I deal with Maltese people on a regular basis through my job; they speak perfect English, often a strangely formalized version of the language in fact, but there's no doubt that they sound "foreign" (and by that I mean "non-native"). English is not a native language, on the whole, in Malta.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Foreignness is in the ear of the beholder.

Ws


----------



## darush

Schem said:


> The English taught in public schools here is thoroughly British...


Definitely, for those who are given _National Flag_ by the UK...


----------



## merquiades

Pedro y La Torre said:


> I deal with Maltese people on a regular basis through my job; *they speak perfect English, often a strangely formalized version of the language in fact*, but there's no doubt that they sound "foreign" (and by that I mean "non-native"). English is not a native language, on the whole, in Malta.



For me, this is the way that most people speak from Commonwealth countries where English is the official language but not the native one.  When you learn English from books for years and years you can achieve a very high degree of fluency but it's stilted and formal.  People there tend to use structures that are no longer active or common in speech, and mix them with others that might be more current but on the whole it ends up sounding strange to the native speaker.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

merquiades said:


> For me, this is the way that most people speak from Commonwealth countries where English is the official language but not the native one.  When you learn English from books for years and years you can achieve a very high degree of fluency but it's stilted and formal.  People there tend to use structures that are no longer active or common in speech, and mix them with others that might be more current but on the whole it ends up sounding strange to the native speaker.



Very true. The Maltese seem to always say "can you kindly do/look/review X"; this is a tad strange, though correct, in my form of English.


----------



## Ania R.

In terms of teaching, Poland definitely prefers BrE, mostly because it's Europe, so it's closer to us. But unless you're studying English as a profession, not that much emphasis is put on the accent, so even if there are British teachers, most people who study English don't really have British accent, they just sort of speak "international" English


----------



## CitizenEmpty

I prefer Canadian English, Received Pronunciation, and Scottish Lowland English.


----------



## merquiades

Ania R. said:


> In terms of teaching, Poland definitely prefers BrE, mostly because it's Europe, so it's closer to us. But unless you're studying English as a profession, not that much emphasis is put on the accent, so even if there are British teachers, most people who study English don't really have British accent, they just sort of speak "international" English



Most teachers of English don't give pronunciation classes here either.  I teach only advanced students and when I tell them how to pronounce they look at me as if I were talking Chinese, so by the time they get to me no one has ever taught them to pronounce th, h, or distinguish sit-seat, boat-bought etc... or insist on its importance.  I'll never understand why teachers only do reading, writing and grammar in their classes.


----------



## Einstein

merquiades said:


> I'll never understand why teachers only do reading, writing and grammar in their classes.


It's because they in turn never learnt the pronunciation; they can't teach what they don't know!


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

In French educational establishments, British English (and by that I mean Received Pronunciation) is almost always preferred to American English. That being said, American English is omnipresent in France in advertisements and the like; and the avalanche of (often patently ridiculous) anglicisms invading French as of late has come almost exclusively via AE.

If I were a non-native, I would prefer to learn American English before anything else. Firstly because it is by far the most widely spoken dialect of English and, secondly, (in my opinion at least) the General American accent is very easy to understand. Americans have a tendency to speak slowly and to pronounce each word clearly. 

That being said, I don't think I could ever bring myself to write ''color'' and ''labor''.


----------



## Stoggler

Pedro y La Torre said:


> That being said, I don't think I could ever bring myself to write ''color'' and ''labor''.



You just did!!


----------



## Sepia

Pedro y La Torre said:


> I deal with Maltese people on a regular basis through my job; they speak perfect English, often a strangely formalized version of the language in fact, but there's no doubt that they sound "foreign" (and by that I mean "non-native"). English is not a native language, on the whole, in Malta.



Are you sure you are not just talking about those Maltese who desperately want to sound English. There is not just one way of speaking Maltese English. It is often very relaxed but also with words stressed in a different way - British people occasionally tell often totally misunderstand the Maltese because of that.

And native: I've met various Maltese who really speak English better than they speak Maltese. To them English is native.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Sepia said:


> _[...] _And native: I've met various Maltese who really speak English better than they speak Maltese. To them English is native.


 

Ws


----------



## Nino83

Pedro y La Torre said:


> If I were a non-native, I would prefer to learn American English before anything else. Firstly because it is by far the most widely spoken dialect of English and, secondly, (in my opinion at least) *the General American accent is very easy to understand*. Americans have a tendency to speak slowly and to pronounce each word clearly.



 

The easiest accents to understand (in decreasing order) for me are: Canadian, General American, Scottish (not Scots), Northern English, London accent. 

Said that, in Italy British English is preferred, if we're speaking about spelling and grammar. 
If we speak about pronunciation, in public (state owned, free) schools, they teach the Italian (macaronic) English: 
bad = bed [bɛd], bud [bäd], bid [bid] bead [biːd], hood [hud] who'd [huːd], so at school the normal pronunciation is [ɛppol] (apple) and on television most journalists say [ɛkt] or even [ect] (act). 
But I think pronunciation is not important at school anywhere (for example no English or American ambassador has a decent Italian pronunciation).


----------



## aprendiendo argento

Croatians prefer American English,
it's what we get on TV.

American spelling is allowed in essays, no Croatian professor of English
would ''ban'' American usage while teaching since students prefer it.

Officially, the Croatian government seems to use the British spelling
while addressing EU matters while it uses American spelling when
dealing with NATO.

An example of Americanized Croatian accent:
http://www.nato.int/multi/video/2007/070119-pfp-planning/v070119a.wmv


----------



## Hector9

I don't think it really makes a difference to learn one dialect (variation) or the other, but what is more important is to learn the language itself as well and fluenty as possible. The variation is accessory as it doesn't demand much time to learn the difference between them (AmE and BrE).

One can learn the AmE variation and use it badly and/or learn the BrE and use it well.

And we should take into account that almost all books teach BrE (the same happens with Spanish books, they teach Spain's variation and not the LatAm one). That's why it's not strange to read learners using BrE instead of AmE (and I observe the same when I read Spanish on these forums, from learners)

Due to the previous reason, schools also teach the BrE variation.

Yet I recognize AmE is more used (on internet and media, at least), and so is LatAm Spanish (although in Europe you may see more the Spain's variation and while it's logic, that doesn't seem to be the case on this whole part of the continent).

In a nutshell, I wouldn't really care about the variation a book teaches me. That can be learned later. But when I've learned the language fluently, then I would tweak it and change to the variation is more used globally.

From what I've seen, learners at the beggining tend to spend  and focus (and waste, in my opinion) a lot of time to learn a particular dialect instead of spending that time on the language itself.


----------



## Mishe

In Slovenia, most teachers and schools prefer to use British textbooks. There is also an increasing tendency to use the so-called "European English", whatever that means. However, the pronunciation is generally much more influenced by the American English, probably due to the strong influence of American popular culture (films, music, etc.).


----------



## rsweet

I found this comment interesting and probably deeper than the fact that the United States is farther away from Germany than England is. When I learned French in California, I was taught a French accent, not a French Canadian accent. Canada is much closer to me than France. Do American schools think the accent in Québec as "nonstandard"? Do schools assume that students learn French to visit France and not Canada? Or is it hard to find teachers with a québeçois accent? Interesting question.


----------



## Mishe

rsweet said:


> I found this comment interesting and probably deeper than the fact that the United States is farther away from Germany than England is. When I learned French in California, I was taught a French accent, not a French Canadian accent. Canada is much closer to me than France. Do American schools think the accent in Québec as "nonstandard"? Do schools assume that students learn French to visit France and not Canada? Or is it hard to find teachers with a québeçois accent? Interesting question.




Interesting question. I studied French for several years and also asked myself this question a couple of times, but I've never heard Francais Quebecois being taught as a second/foreign language in any country. Seems like French is a rather "centralist" language, but I could be wrong.


----------



## merquiades

Mishe said:


> Interesting question. I studied French for several years and also asked myself this question a couple of times, but I've never heard Francais Quebecois being taught as a second/foreign language in any country. Seems like French is a rather "centralist" language, but I could be wrong.


 Yes, to the point that TV/radio in Canada tries to approximate the French standard.  An example of change is that until the 1960's Canadian French had a rolled r which was the original northwest France r transmitted there during colonization in the 17th century.  With more audiovisual exposure to France, and education in standard French, the uvular r is imitated and is starting to replace the rolled r.  In general, European French is not considered foreign, just a more formal version of local French.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

merquiades said:


> Yes, to the point that TV/radio in Canada tries to approximate the French standard.  An example of change is that until the 1960's Canadian French had a rolled r which was the original northwest France r transmitted there during colonization in the 17th century.  With more audiovisual exposure to France, and education in standard French, the uvular r is imitated and is starting to replace the rolled r.  In general, European French is not considered foreign, just a more formal version of local French.



This used to be true (French Canadian TV in the 50s and 60s used wholly artificial French accents). It isn't anymore.


----------



## SuperXW

China is a country takes language education very seriously. Our government standardizes every element in our mother language through unified textbooks, official dictionaries and strict exams. So, it's only natural they wouldn't allow both British and American English being taught randomly in schools. To prevent the mess, our textbooks were only written in British English.


----------



## 涼宮

Pronunciation-wise for your average Mandarin speaker British English should prove easier to pronounce.

In Venezuela things can be weird, but American English tends to win. Despite the Venezuelan government being at odds with the US and always speaking ill of them and passing that hatred down to its followers AmE tends to be what most people (the few who speak anyway) speak. Some books use British English but in the end even teachers use American English. However, we have some people who try their darnedest to learn and speak British English because they believe it's the ''one and true English'', but end up miserably failing anyway because American English is everywhere they go, books, films, music, Internet, etc.


----------



## Nino83

涼宮 said:


> but end up miserably failing anyway because American English is everywhere they go, books, films, *music*, Internet, etc.



I think in music the position of British English is still good, if we speak about rock music (from Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones to Oasis, Arctic Monkeys and others), and Northern English accents are well positioned (all the above metioned bands except Pink Floyd and Rolling Stones are from the "North", i.e from Birmingham to Scotland).


----------



## Mishe

Nino83 said:


> I think in music the position of British English is still good, if we speak about rock music (from Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones to Oasis, Arctic Monkeys and others), and Northern English accents are well positioned (all the above metioned bands except Pink Floyd and Rolling Stones are from the "North", i.e from Birmingham to Scotland).



Yeah, but hardly anyone sings in British English accents/dialects.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Mishe said:


> Yeah, but hardly anyone sings in British English accents/dialects.



95 per cent of the time, you won't be able to tell where someone's from when they sing (at least, I can't).


----------



## Mishe

Pedro y La Torre said:


> 95 per cent of the time, you won't be able to tell where someone's from when they sing (at least, I can't).



Unless, of course, they make a conscious effort to do so. 

It has always been obvious that bands like Oasis sing in their native accent. 

Sinead O'Connor, for example, has also made a conscious effort not to sing in this generic Americanlike accent and nowadays it's very clear she's Irish when you her her singing.


----------



## Nino83

Mishe said:


> Yeah, but hardly anyone sings in British English accents/dialects.



Really? 
I often listen to Arctic Monkeys (from Sheffield) or The Wombats (from Liverpool) and there are some clear features, the most audible is the pronunciation of /æ/ like the Italian /a/ (clearly central) or, in the case of Liverpool (and Manchester), the pronunciation of the "g" in the final "ing" and that of /ʊ/ very open, like a Spanish [o̞] (a bit more advanced/central) and a very open /ɛ/. 

Listen, for example, to "Backfire at the Disco" (The Wombats): 
"She t*oo*k down my number and home addr*e*ss" (very open vowels) 
"It b*a*ckfired at the disco, she sl*a*pped me at the disco" (like Italian /a/). 
"Well it's 3 o' clock and I'm feel*ing* shite" 
"Kill the Director" (The Wombats): 
"So with the angst of a teenage b*a*nd (central /a/ also before nasals) 
"Here's another so*ng* about a gender i'll never underst*a*nd" (central /a/ and /g/ pronunciation in "song") 
"Here's another so*ng* about a gender i'll never underst*a*nd" (central /a/ and /g/ pronunciation in "song") 

There is the same central /a/ in Arctic Monkeys songs.


----------



## Einstein

British singers invariably pronounce "dance" as something near to "dence", American style, while no British regional pronunciation remotely approaches this.


----------



## Mishe

Another contemporary singer that sings kind of in British is Mika.


----------



## Nino83

Einstein said:


> British singers invariably pronounce "dance" as something near to "dence", American style



Listen to "Dancing Shoes" and "I Bet You Look Good On The Dancefloor" (Arctic Monkeys): 
"Get on your dancing shoes" (first sentence of the first song) 
"I Bet You Look Good On The Dancefloor" (refrain of the second song) 
In these songs there are not American style pronounciations of "dance". 
The same for "Let's Dance to Joy Division" (The Wombats).


----------



## Stoggler

It does seem to vary depending on style of music and the group/artist(s) in question.  More poppy and dance tracks have a more mid-Atlantic pronunciation as a rule for example.  But as others have pointed out, there are a number of British bands who eschew such "affectations".  

You could always listen to The Wurzels or Chas n Dave if you want pukka British pronunciation...


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Stoggler said:


> It does seem to vary depending on style of music and the group/artist(s) in question.  More poppy and dance tracks *have a more mid-Atlantic pronunciation* as a rule for example.  But as others have pointed out, there are a number of British bands who eschew such "affectations".



Bono comes to mind.


----------



## Nino83

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Bono comes to mind.



But at the beginning (let's say, from 1980 to 1987) he dropped his "r" before consonants and at the end of a word (not followed by a vowel).


----------



## merquiades

I've noticed for a long time that British pop or rock singers usually sing in American accents and wondered why. It's true there is a huge financial incentive to market to American audiences.  Adele and Amy Winehouse come to mind just off the top of my head.

By the way, whatever accent Mika is trying to do, he sounds just awful.  I can't stand hearing him.

Lily Allen's Cockney brogue sounds pretty shocking also.  


			
				Mishe said:
			
		

> It has always been obvious that bands like Oasis sing in their native accent.


  Really?  For a long time I didn't even know they were British.


----------



## Nino83

On the contrary I love Northern English accents (Scousie, Mancunian, Yorkshire). 
Also American accents are good.


----------



## merquiades

The Proclaimers' Scottish accent is fun.


----------



## Nino83

merquiades said:


> The Proclaimers' Scottish accent is fun.



 

Probably I like these accents because I like those bands. 
But, from a phonetic point of view, they seem more similar to Italian vowels. 
No difference between flat and broad "a" (with only an open central "a"), a schwa-like "but" vowel, generally one quality (with length difference) for "bot" and "bought" vowels, a mid "o" quality for the short "u" (very open, more easily differentiated with the long "u") and so on (a system which is very similar to that of the Canadian accent, which is rhotic). I'm speaking of the accents (not of the dialects).


----------



## JamesM

Einstein said:


> British singers invariably pronounce "dance" as something near to "dence", American style, while no British regional pronunciation remotely approaches this.



"Dence" certainly isn't any American accent I know.   I've always noticed this, too, but it doesn't sound American at all to me.  It's uniquely a British singer thing.


----------



## merquiades

Nino83 said:


> Probably I like these accents because I like those bands.
> But, from a phonetic point of view, they seem more similar to Italian vowels.
> No difference between flat and broad "a" (with only an open central "a"), a schwa-like "but" vowel, generally one quality (with length difference) for "bot" and "bought" vowels, a mid "o" quality for the short "u" (very open, more easily differentiated with the long "u") and so on (a system which is very similar to that of the Canadian accent, which is rhotic). I'm speaking of the accents (not of the dialects).



You mean pronouncing /bət/ for "but"?  That seems odd.
And only a length difference between "bot" and "bought"?  Without the diphthong?
An "o" instead of short "u"?  What do you mean, "op" instead of "up"? 

Putting Canadian along Scottish, on the whole they sound pretty different for me?  Not just because of vowel sounds but consonants too, like the rolled R , the glottal stop, the palatalized "s"  in Scottish speech etc.



			
				JamesM said:
			
		

> "Dence" certainly isn't any American accent I know.  I've always noticed this, too, but it doesn't sound American at all to me. It's uniquely a British singer thing.


  The Italians, Spanish etc. cannot hear the difference between "sat" and "set" and are always saying throughout the forum that they have merged in American English, and on the contrary the British pronounce them with Italian-like vowels. My ears have never picked up on either of them.


----------



## Nino83

merquiades said:


> You mean pronouncing /bət/ for "but"?  That seems odd.
> An "o" instead of short "u"?  What do you mean, "op" instead of "up"?



The answer is: yes. 
See here
In Birmingham the difference between "hudd" and "heard" is just length, and F1 is about 480 Hz in the North (compared to the 623 Hz of the Southwestrn British and 550Hz of the US). It is a shorter (and a little backed version) of the /ɜ/. 
In Lancashire and Liverpool the vowel of "hood" has F1 = 490 Hz (Italian /o/ is 420 Hz and the /ɔ/ is about 520 Hz). In other words the Scousie /ʊ/ is more similar to the Italian /ɔ/ than to the Italian /o/. 
I'm speaking in Italian terms and IPA terms. The vowel in "chord" has F1 = 600 Hz in Boston (is it your accent?) and it is even opener in those accents with the cot/caught merger. 
It's obvious that the Scousie /ʊ/ is higher than *your /ɔ:/* (but it is similar to my /ɔ/, a little more central). 
The word is not "up" (which is pronounced more or less [ɜp] in Northern accents, I'm not speaking of Northern *dialects*, which lack the foot-strut split, but of the Standard English spoken with a Northern accent) but, for example "look" and "took". 



merquiades said:


> And only a length difference between "bot" and "bought"? Without the diphthong?



Are you saying that the vowel of "bought" is a diphthong? where? 



merquiades said:


> The Italians, Spanish etc. cannot hear the difference between "sat" and "set" and are always saying throughout the forum that they have merged in American English, and on the contrary the British pronounce them with Italian-like vowels. My ears have never picked up on either of them.



Excuse me, but what I hear is confirmed by phonologists. The flat "a" in Liverpool has F2 = 1393 Hz, in the US it has F2 > 1825 Hz. There is a huge difference between the pronunciation of The Wombats or Artic Monkeys and that of an American band (let's say , Queens of the Stone Age). 
We hear the difference between "sat" and "set". 
What we don't hear is the difference between "man" and "men" in American English (i.e flat "a" before nasals). 
This is due to the fact that F1 of short "a" before nasals in AmE is about 400 Hz (while before other consonants is more or less 600/700 Hz, depending on the accent). 
In other words, Northern English (like Wombats, Arctic Monkeys) say "underst*a*nd" and "d*a*nce" while Americans say "underst*eh*nd" and "d*eh*nce". 
It is a matter of facts and it was an Englishman who said it (Einstein), not an Italian or a Spanish speaker.


----------



## JamesM

merquiades said:


> The Italians, Spanish etc. cannot hear the difference between "sat" and "set" and are always saying throughout the forum that they have merged in American English, and on the contrary the British pronounce them with Italian-like vowels. My ears have never picked up on either of them.



That's interesting.  "Sat" and "set" are very distinct to me, but then I'm listening for what I'm expecting.  "Sat" is much more open and broader.  

The song that came to mind when I read "Dence" for "dance" was David Bowie singing "Put on your red shoes and 'dehnce' with me" ("Let's Dance").  It's closer to an American "dance" than the British RP "dahnse" but the "a" is closed down a bit.  The background singers sing "dance" with a very American accent and a flat, open "an" sound.   George Michael in "Careless Whisper" also leans towards that same "dehnse" sound about half the time, although "chance" comes out consistently with an American flat "a".

Another one is Rick Astley in "She Wants To Dance With Me".  A lot of his vowels have the twang and broadness of soul music, but the word "dance" comes out "dense" on the hook, pretty much every time except when he drags it out as "she wants to da-ee-a-ee-a-ee-ance".


----------



## merquiades

JamesM said:


> That's interesting.  "Sat" and "set" are very distinct to me, but then I'm listening for what I'm expecting.  "Sat" is much more open and broader.
> 
> The song that came to mind when I read "Dence" for "dance" was David Bowie singing "Put on your red shoes and 'dehnce' with me" ("Let's Dance").  It's closer to an American "dance" than the British RP "dahnse" but the "a" is closed down a bit.  The background singers sing "dance" with a very American accent and a flat, open "an" sound.   George Michael in "Careless Whisper" also leans towards that same "dehnse" sound about half the time, although "chance" comes out consistently with an American flat "a".



I agree.  The sounds are distinct.
I'll listen to those songs and see if I hear "dence" for "dance" but I don't think Americans of any accent would pronounce "an" as "en",  although some people in Kentucky do say "en" as "in".  Like "give me a ballpoint pin".


----------



## JamesM

> I don't think Americans of any accent would pronounce "an" as "en",



No, they wouldn't.  That's why I thought it was odd that Einstein associated it with an American accent.

The only place I've heard Americans say "dense" for "dance" is in movies from the 1930s when actors had a sort of pseudo-British way of speaking.

Try the Rick Astley song.  I think you'll hear it there, particularly because he pronounces it two different ways.


----------



## merquiades

JamesM said:


> Try the Rick Astley song.  I think you'll hear it there, particularly because he pronounces it two different ways.


  Yes, he says something close to "dense"  then later on he also says "danes".  He's got a kind of  twangy sounding accent.  In another song he say "if you do waunt..."  And in yet another one he say... "Never gaunna make you crah, never gaunna say good bah"


----------



## Wordsmyth

Nino83 said:


> _[...]_ if we speak about rock music (from Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones to Oasis, Arctic Monkeys and others), and Northern English accents are well positioned (all the above metioned bands except Pink Floyd and Rolling Stones are from the "North", i.e from Birmingham to Scotland).



All the Midlanders I know (and I know a great many) would not class the Midlands (and therefore not Birmingham) as the North! Nor would geographers: that's why the region is called the *Mid*lands. You may be tempted to dive into a spectrum analysis to show some similarities between Midlands accents and various Northern accents, but then you'd also find similarities between Midlands accents and some Southern accents.

But even if you're talking of an area "from Birmingham to Scotland", that hardly includes Led Zeppelin. Plant (lead vocalist) was from Kidderminster, and Bonham was from Redditch: both in Worcestershire and both further south than Brum. Page was from Middlesex and JPJ from Kent (neither of which can in any way be described as "North"!). Led Zep was formed in London. 

As Stoggler mentioned (#94), the Wurzels and Chas & Dave have strong regional singing accents, but then they're deliberately playing up those accents (North Somerset and Cockney respectively), often for comic effect. If you want a good example of a British singer whose natural singing accent is unmistakably from the North, I can recommend Kate Rusby, whose singing voice is unmistakably and delightfully South Yorkshire (or West Riding as I used to know it).


merquiades said:


> I've noticed for a long time that British pop or rock singers usually sing in American accents and wondered why. It's true there is a huge financial incentive to market to American audiences.  Adele and Amy Winehouse come to mind just off the top of my head.


 I think it goes back to the fifties, when rock'n'roll became big in the US, and quickly made its way to the UK. The first rock'n'roll singers were all American (Carl Perkins, Bill Haley, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard, Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, etc, etc). In Britain, skiffle was already big, and skiffle groups were playing high-tempo versions of American folk, country and blues songs — with, of course, 'authentic' American accents. When British groups started playing rock'n'roll, they simply emulated the accents of the big American stars. Later, groups such as the Stones, the Animals, etc, played a big part in the blues and blues rock revival in the UK, using songs of Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, Leadbelly, and so on — so naturally with American accents. Howlin' Wolf with a Kentish or Geordie accent just wouldn't have worked!

I doubt that any of those 50s and 60s UK groups had the US commercial market in mind: they'd developed their singing style long before they could even dream of international success. If the accent was adopted deliberately, I'd say it was in the interests of authenticity. But I suspect that it was essentially an automatic imitation; it's just the way that kind of music was sung. I'm sure a lot of singers didn't/don't consciously think of it as an American accent: it's just a 'rock vocals' accent.

Although British pop/rock styles have diversified a lot since then, that accent still lingers on. The idea of Robert Plant singing with a Kidder accent, or Clapton with a Surrey accent, is almost laughable. Amy Winehouse's style was very jazz-influenced: another American genre. As for Adele, well, there I had to do a little reading; and I found that her early influences were Aaliyah, Destiny's Child and Mary J Blige, as well as the music of Etta James and Ella Fitzgerald: notice anything in common?

Ws


----------



## Nino83

Wordsmyth said:


> that hardly includes Led Zeppelin.



I agree. I mentioned Led Zeppelin about AmE vs. BE in rock music. What I mean is that there are many Northern English indie rock bands who sing with their accent.


----------



## Einstein

I'm afraid I don't have time to come back with a detailed explanation, but I just want to clarify that I don't think Americans actually pronounce "dance" as "dense", but to an unpractised Italian or German ear it can sound similar. The British pronunciation of "dance" varies from a simple "a" (as in many European languages) in the north and midlands to "aah" in the south-east (which had a big influence on RP), but never "æ". This sound occurs in other words, like "apple", but not in "dance".

In Italy the idea exists that if you pronounce every "a", whether in "hat" or "hate", also schwa, as an "e", you know English! Adrian becomes Edrien, while Matt Damon becomes Mett Demon (rhyming with lemon). Alive becomes elive.


----------



## merquiades

Wordsmyth said:


> I doubt that any of those 50s and 60s UK groups had the US commercial market in mind: they'd developed their singing style long before they could even dream of international success. If the accent was adopted deliberately, I'd say it was in the interests of authenticity. But I suspect that it was essentially an automatic imitation; it's just the way that kind of music was sung. I'm sure a lot of singers didn't/don't consciously think of it as an American accent: it's just a 'rock vocals' accent.


  I can buy that.  That reminds me of a trend in the US for country music singers to sing in a strong southern accent even if they do not originally come from that area.  It might be that desire for authenticity.  Country in strong Chicagoese would sound ridiculous.


----------



## Nino83

Einstein said:


> In Italy the idea exists that if you pronounce every "a", whether in "hat" or "hate", also schwa, as an "e", you know English! Adrian becomes Edrien, while Matt Damon becomes Mett Demon (rhyming with lemon). Alive becomes elive.



And many journalists say "jobs ect".


----------



## Wordsmyth

merquiades said:


> I can buy that.  That reminds me of a trend in the US for country music singers to sing in a strong southern accent even if they do not originally come from that area.  It might be that desire for authenticity.  Country in strong Chicagoese would sound ridiculous.


 Mark Knopfler is an interesting case. His accent seems to vary according to the context of the lyrics. In songs about Northumberland, where he was brought up, he has a Geordie-ish accent. In others, it varies from more-or-less neutral British to mid-Atlantic. When the context is American, it's more American (Money for Nothing, for example) ... and on his album with Emmylou Harris I hear tones I'd put somewhere around North Carolina.

Ws


----------



## merquiades

Wordsmyth said:


> Mark Knopfler is an interesting case. His accent seems to vary according to the context of the lyrics. In songs about Northumberland, where he was brought up, he has a Geordie-ish accent. In others, it varies from more-or-less neutral British to mid-Atlantic. When the context is American, it's more American (Money for Nothing, for example) ... and on his album with Emmylou Harris I hear tones I'd put somewhere around North Carolina.
> 
> Ws



You're right!  He's definitely going for Alabama. "Tayme's running aout for me." At some point he had dropped off my radar.  I had failed to realize he had metamorphosed into a country music star.  However was I surprised.


----------



## Stoggler

Wordsmyth said:


> Mark Knopfler is an interesting case. His accent seems to vary according to the context of the lyrics. In songs about Northumberland, where he was brought up, he has a Geordie-ish accent. In others, it varies from more-or-less neutral British to mid-Atlantic. When the context is American, it's more American (Money for Nothing, for example) ... and on his album with Emmylou Harris I hear tones I'd put somewhere around North Carolina.
> 
> Ws



I was surprised when I learned that he was from the north-east of England.  I had heard him in an interview years after hearing his songs and had assumed he was American.  Hearing a north-east accent coming from someone you had previously thought was from the US was a bit surreal at first!


----------



## Wordsmyth

The difference between singing accents and speaking accents is interesting. Having mentioned that Mark Knopfler's singing accent varies, I've now listened to him speaking in a few interviews; and it seems that his speaking accent also varies. 

In several interviews with non-British interviewers (or co-interviewees), his accent is fairly neutral 'middle class' Brit; he even pronounces "last" with something close to an RP [ɑː], rather than the northern fronted [a]. However, in an interview with Parkinson (who's from Yorkshire), Knopfler's speech has more of a northern lilt, with a few distinctly Geordie bits.

Ws


----------



## Nino83

merquiades said:


> The Italians, Spanish etc. cannot hear the difference between "sat" and "set" and are always saying throughout the forum that they have merged in American English, and on the contrary the British pronounce them with Italian-like vowels. My ears have never picked up on either of them.



For the precision, also Luciano Canepari says that Northern English /æ/ = canIPA [a], IPA [ä], i.e open central and Eastern Midlands /æ/ = canIPA [A], IPA [a], i.e open front-central (English Pronunciations, page 202, accent of York, page 190, accent of Birmingham), and it is well present (the central one) in the songs and bands I was speaking about. 
For example, in "Certain Romance" (Arctic Monkeys) there is an entire verse full of "Italian style" a's followed by "n": 
"Don't get me wrong though there's boys in b*a*nds And kids who like to scrap with pool cues in their h*a*nds And just 'cause he's had a couple of c*a*ns" 
compare just the Southern British and American pronunciation can (the AmE is [keən], like [heənd] and [beənd]). 
In the same song we find also "punch" [pʊnʧ] and "funny" [fɞni] (with a more or less mid-open back-central rounded vowel).


----------



## Sepia

Einstein;15144367...In Italy the idea exists that if you pronounce every "a" said:
			
		

> A whole lot of Germans seem to aggree - for reasons I have never been able to figure out.


----------



## Nino83

In almost all foreign accents /æ/ is pronounced with an open "e" (and there are also native accents like Cockney, Australian, and so on).


----------



## Wordsmyth

Sepia said:


> A whole lot of Germans seem to aggree - for reasons I have never been able to figure out.


 I've had it explained to me, more than once, by German teachers of English, who perceive /æ/ as being pronounced much like [ɛ], and who insist that that's the 'normal' (or at least 'correct') BrE pronunciation of English words such as _bad, hat_ and _cat_. They're surprised when I tell them that was true of some traditional RP speakers up until about the mid-twentieth century (a minority group even then, but much flaunted by the BBC and in academic circles), but that for more than half a century hardly any UK English speakers have used that pronunciation. Some modern UK dictionaries and language reference sources have even dropped /æ/, and now show standard pronunciations as /bad/, /hat/, /kat/, etc. But some non-native teachers of English (in Germany, and apparently in Italy, and probably elsewhere) are still teaching what they were taught by others, who taught what they were taught, ... 

Ws


----------



## Nino83

Wordsmyth said:


> Some modern UK dictionaries and language reference sources have even dropped /æ/, and now show standard pronunciations as /bad/, /hat/, /kat/, etc.



It depends on the speaker. 
Both Labov and Canepari (which are very different phoneticians, they often disagree on methodology) agree on the fact that in "mediatic" (the so called General American) and broad American accents, /æ/ before nasals is [ɛə] (even [eə] in broad accents)

If we're speaking about UK, it's true that in Northern accents there is [ä] (central) and in the Midlands, West Country and the Western Home Counties (Oxford, Northampton, Peterborough, Southampton) there is [a] (front-central), but still today, in Central Home counties (Milton Keynes, Cambridge, Ipswich, Luton, Guildford, Brigton, Dover) and London, /æ/ is [ɛ] because in these accents /ʌ/ is very low, i.e [ä] (or even [a] in Cockney). 
Some works, like those of Cheshire about "Multicultural London English" say that some younger speakers in London have more back positions for both /æ/ and /ʌ/ (respectively [a] and [ɑ]) but in "mediatic" pronunciation, i.e the so called "Estuary English", which is an accent which has some features of London (Cockney) and Central Home Counties accents, /æ/ is still [ɛ] because /ʌ/ is very low, i.e [ä] (open but not as fronted as in Cockney, i.e [a]). 

http://venus.unive.it/canipa/dokuwi...n:pdf&cache=cache&media=en:eps_4_mediatic.pdf 

So, foreign teachers are not completely wrong, because "Estuary English" is one of the most spoken accents on BBC and other channels.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Nino83 said:


> _[...]_ but still today, in Central Home counties (Milton Keynes, Cambridge, Ipswich, Luton, Guildford, Brigton, Dover) and London, /æ/ is [ɛ] because in these accents /ʌ/ is very low, i.e [ä] (or even [a] in Cockney).
> Some works, like those of Cheshire about "Multicultural London English" say that some younger speakers in London have more back positions for both /æ/ and /ʌ/ (respectively [a] and [ɑ]) but in "mediatic" pronunciation, i.e the so called "Estuary English", which is an accent which has some features of London (Cockney) and Central Home Counties accents, /æ/ is still [ɛ] _[...]_


I don't know what basis such theorists use to draw such conclusions: perhaps spectrogram analysis of selected samples?  My comments were based on the thousands of native speakers I've listened to over time, and still hear on a daily basis (directly, with my ears, not in recordings which can be somewhat artificial) — and yes, I spend time with people from Milton Keynes, Cambridge, Luton and Guildford, among others. 

Of course, without technical analysis each individual's perception of what constitutes [æ], [ɛ] and [a] is pretty subjective, So let me re-express my point in relative terms, without any absolute reference to particular phones (as defined technically) ...

In the early/mid 20th century, 'traditional RP' speakers pronounced _bad_ almost exactly as they pronounced _bed_; (listen to recordings of BBC presenters and reporters in the '50s). Those speakers were a minority even then, but their accent was adopted and propagated around the world as 'standard' British English. Nowadays it's hard to find anyone with that accent (apart from the Queen and a few elderly members of the 'upper classes'). 'Estuary English' speakers pronounce _bad_ quite differently from _bed_, as do virtually all UK English speakers. Regardless of what the vowel in _bad_ actually is (and it varies greatly), it's not the vowel of _bed_.

Now, *if *you want to say that the vowel of _bed_ is pronunced [ɛ], and *if *you want to say that the vowel of _bad_ is /æ/, then it's not true that /æ/ is pronounced [ɛ] by any significant group of UK speakers. 

So if 'foreign' teachers are teaching that _bad_ is pronounced the same way as _bed_ in any variant of modern UK English, then I maintain that they are wrong. 

Ws


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Wordsmyth said:


> In the early/mid 20th century, 'traditional RP' speakers pronounced _bad_ almost exactly as they pronounced _bed_; (listen to recordings of BBC presenters and reporters in the '50s). Those speakers were a minority even then, but their accent was adopted and propagated around the world as 'standard' British English. Nowadays it's hard to find anyone with that accent (apart from the Queen and a few elderly members of the 'upper classes').



Really? Even in the upper classes?


----------



## Nino83

Wordsmyth said:


> I don't know what basis such theorists use to draw such conclusions: perhaps spectrogram analysis of selected samples?



Analysis of many speakers and "normalized" values (as they say). 



Wordsmyth said:


> Now, *if *you want to say that the vowel of _bed_ is pronunced [ɛ], and *if *you want to say that the vowel of _bad_ is /æ/, then it's not true that /æ/ is pronounced [ɛ] by any significant group of UK speakers.



I didn't say that.  

In Traditional Cockney (people 40 years old and more and youger people who speak with this accent): bad [ɛ] bed [e̞  ̴  e] bud [a] 
Central Home Counties: bad [ɛ] bed [e̞] bud [ä] 
Australian and New Zealand: bad [ɛ] bed [e] bud [ä] 
Midlands, West Country, West Home Counties: bad [a] bed [e̞]/[ɛ] bud [ʌ] 
Northern English: bad [ä] bed [ɛ] bud [ʌ] ([ʊ], dialectal) 
North America: bad [æ] bed [e̞] bud [ʌ] but man, i.e /æn/ [ɛə] 
Northern Cities Shift: bad [ɛə] bed [e̞] bud [ʌ̙] (both /æ/ and /æn/ [ɛə]) 

There are these values (according to most phoneticians), written in official IPA. 

There are no accents with the bad/bed merger. Nobody says that. 
On the other hand, the values of /æ/ and /e/ are different, depending on the accent.


----------



## Wordsmyth

Nino83 said:


> _ [...] _I didn't say that. _ [...] _


 I know. That's why I said "if".


Nino83 said:


> _ [...] _There are no accents with the bad/bed merger. Nobody says that. _[...]_


 Thanks, Nino, you've made my point. I was addressing Einstein's comment, reiterated by Sepia: 





Einstein said:


> _ [...] _In Italy the idea exists that if you pronounce every "a", whether in "hat" or "hate", also schwa, as an "e", you know English! Adrian becomes Edrien, while Matt Damon becomes Mett Demon (rhyming with lemon). Alive becomes elive.


 It's not about absolute values of vowels, but about relative values. 'Traditional RP' *did* have a _bad/bed_ merger; present-day English forms don't. If some non-native (Italian, German, ...) speakers practice a _bad/bed_ merger, then the explanation that they're emulating an out-of-date 'traditional' RP (taught by their teachers who were taught by their teachers) seems quite likely.

There is an argument that says they can't achieve any of the BrE realisations of /æ/, because their native languages don't have them, and so they naturally approximate to [ɛ]. I'm not convinced by that. On more than one occasion, Germans have told me that they say, for example, "He's not a bed chep" because they were taught that it was correct. After a few seconds of getting them to repeat "bad chap" (with an [a]), they're quite capable of doing it. I then tell them to go and listen to other BrE speakers, and they come back saying things like "You're right, it's a proper 'a'; I'd never noticed that before". 
I've also noticed that the phenomenon doesn't seem to occur with Germans I've met who've learned English by imitation, in a 'natural immersion' situation, rather than academically. 



Pedro y La Torre said:


> Really? Even in the upper classes?


Really, Pedro ... well, in my experience anyway. I know a number of families (some in Debrett's, even) where the grandparents have very plummy accents (and hev jem for tea), the parents much less so, and the younger generation sound entirely 'normal' (and eat jam ... refined jam, perhaps, but still jam). 

Ws


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Wordsmyth said:


> Really, Pedro ... well, in my experience anyway. I know a number of families (some in Debrett's, even) where the grandparents have very plummy accents (and hev jem for tea), the parents much less so, and the younger generation sound entirely 'normal' (and eat jam ... refined jam, perhaps, but still jam).
> 
> Ws



This is how British Army officers used to speak. I suppose the officer here is either dead or one of those grandparents you were talking about!


----------



## Nino83

Wordsmyth said:


> It's not about absolute values of vowels, but about relative values. 'Traditional RP' *did* have a _bad/bed_ merger; present-day English forms don't. If some non-native (Italian, German, ...) speakers practice a _bad/bed_ merger, then the explanation that they're emulating an out-of-date 'traditional' RP (taught by their teachers who were taught by their teachers) seems quite likely.



Yes, at school it is taught like that (there are other mergers, like bit/beat and hood/who'd). 
If teachers wanted to teach British English they should say that if you pronounce "bat" with an [ɛ] you should pronounce "bet" with an [e] (we have both sounds) or one could pronounce "bat" with an [a] (or an [æ], if it's possible) and "bet" with an [ɛ]. 

What I don't understand is why some Americans keep saying they don't pronounce "dance", "hands" and "man" with an "e". It is really an "e". It is, often, even higher than an Italian/French/Portuguese/Catalan/Galician (and so on) open "e". 

The difference between Northern English [män] and North American [meən] is bigger than the difference between "ballo" (dance) and "bello" (beautiful) in Italian. 

http://it.forvo.com/word/bat/#en doesn't the word "bat" of the Australian speaker greengobbie92 sound like "bet"? and that of angryjohn, near Chicago? 
http://it.forvo.com/word/bet/#en in fact, greengobbie92 pronounces "bet" with a closed "e", [e] 

London (Cockney) and other accents of Home Counties have a similar vowel system (raised /æ/ and /e/). 

So I think teachers are not wrong when they say to pronounce "bat" [bɛt]. They are wrong when they don't teach that if one pronounces /æ/ higher, then he has to raise his /e/ as well. 



Einstein said:


> In Italy the idea exists that if you pronounce every "a", whether in "hat" or "hate", also schwa, as an "e", you know English!



It is true for the "long o", /oʊ/, which is pronounced with a monophthong, like in "boat", "open" but it is not true for the "long a", /eɪ/, which it is pronounced [ɛj] (except for "break", "great" that, because of the spelling, are pronounced "grijt" and "brek"), like in "make up", "Dave".


----------



## sumelic

Nino83 said:


> Yes, at school it is taught like that (there are other mergers, like bit/beat and hood/who'd).
> If teachers wanted to teach British English they should say that if you pronounce "bat" with an [ɛ] you should pronounce "bet" with an [e] (we have both sounds) or one could pronounce "bat" with an [a] (or an [æ], if it's possible) and "bet" with an [ɛ].
> 
> What I don't understand is why some Americans keep saying they don't pronounce "dance", "hands" and "man" with an "e". It is really an "e". It is, often, even higher than an Italian/French/Portuguese/Catalan/Galician (and so on) open "e".



Well, I speak Californian English natively, and I have learned some French. The French sound [e] to me sounds similar to the starting point of my English /eɪ/.
To me, the sound in "dance", "hands", "man", is the same as that of "mail" or "fair". But, I don't think this sound is simply [eə], because it doesn't seem primarily diphthongal to me, and the start point seems different in some way from that of /eɪ/. (In fact, I can produce a diphthong that starts with the "man" vowel and ends with [ɪ̯], and it sounds (barely) distinct from /eɪ/.)

I also don't think my vowel in "bat" is /ɛ/ or even anywhere close to it. The pronunciation of /a/ in the French word "batte" sounds closer the vowel in English "bat" for me than the pronunciation of the word "bête".


----------



## Nino83

In fact these sounds are different (just as I wrote): 
  /æ/ [æ]
/æn/ [ɛə] (but in some American accents also [e̞ə] or even [eə])*
/e/ [e̞], /eɪ/ [e̞ɪ] 
In Canada and California (due to the cot-caught merger with [ɑ] in a more back position) /æ/ is less fronted, [a], similar to the non-Cockney British /a/ (which is [a], a bit more fronted than Italian, Spanish, Portuguese /a/, [ä]).  
But in other accents (Cockney, some accents in the Home Counties, Australian, New Zealand), /æ/ [ɛ]. 

* You are right, this transcription is a bit broad, because it is more like [ɛɛ̙], i.e this diphthong is very narrow. 

Some sample:  
http://it.forvo.com/word/ant/#en here, k8te has /æn/ [eə] or even [ɪə] 
but, in words without nasals: 
http://it.forvo.com/word/back/#en Californian /æ/ is quite similar to British /æ/, [a] (delibes, tristanJames) but Australian /æ/ is [ɛ] (greengobbie92)


----------



## mexerica feliz

The American pronunciation of

language

/ˈlæŋgwɪʤ/   http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/language

the sound sample can be heard here:  http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/language?q=language

it's definitely an [æ] and not an [e].

---
As for modern Southern British English:


flash /flaʃ/   (not  /flɛʃ/  or /fleʃ/)    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/flash
flesh  /flɛʃ/  (not  /fleʃ/
flush /flʌʃ/ pronounced as [flɐʃ] and not as [flaʃ]

Do not pronounce flush as flash, and flash as flesh! 

It is funny, in Italian they pronounce _cover _(of a song) with an [o],
and _club _with an [e].


----------



## Nino83

Hi, mexerica. 

Labov calls it pattern IV. 
Some accents, like 1800-1950 London (Traditional Cockney) and Home Counties accents, Australian and New Zealand English, had this shift and Southern accents in the US have a very similar pattern. 

In Southeast England, Australia and New Zealand, the diphthong /aɪ/ > [ɒɪ], then there is an empty space, so /eɪ/ > [ɐɪ] or [aɪ], /ɪi/ > [ɘi], i.e the first vowel of these diphthongs goes down and it is more central, so there are empty spaces in the front zone, and there is the raising of /æ/ > [ɛ], /e/> [e]. Then /ʌ/ > [ä] (Australian, Home Counties) or [a] (Cockney). 
This system is still found today in Australia and New Zealand, while in London and in the Home Counties there was a partial reversal, from Cockney lowered diphthongs and raised short front vowels to a more traditional (Northern, West Country, Midlands) English pattern, /æ/ > [ɛ] > [a], /e/> [e] > [e̞] or even [ɛ]. 
http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/1081/1/TorgersenKerswill8pdf.pdf 

There is a similar pattern today, in Southern accents in the US. /aɪ/ > [aː], /eɪ/ > [aɪ], /ɪi/ > [ɘi] and /æ/ > [ɛ], /e/> [e̞] > [e] (these short vowels in these accents become a bit longer, i.e they develop inglides). 

So, today, in Northern English, Midlands, West Country and younger speaker in London we have /æ/ = [a] (England, in general) or [ä] (Northern English only). 
In Australia, New Zealand, some older speakers in London, in most Southern accents in the US, /æ/ = [ɛ]. 



> In southern England and Australia, the short vowels shift to relatively higher and fronter positions without developing inglides. In New Zealand, /i/ moves back to high central position, forming a chain shift with /e/ as it rises to high front peripheral position


 (Labov, Atlas of North American English, page 125) 



> The triggering event is a change in the front upgliding diphthong /ay/. In most of the languages and dialects affected by this process, the nucleus of /ay/ moves back and upward along the peripheral path as route 1 in Figure 18.3. This is the path followed in most southern British dialects, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa (Labov, Yaeger, and Steiner 1972, Trudgill 2004).


 (Labov, page 244) 

On this point both Labov, Trudgill and Canepari agree and Southern /æ/ sounds to me like an [ɛ] (and it is confirmed by some American member of this forum who took my /ɛ/ for an /æ/). 

http://it.forvo.com/word/cat/#en 
greengobbie92 (Australia) [ɛ], NipponJapan (Southern US) [ɛ] , jackabrams (Southern US) [ɛɐ], almost all other speakers in the US [æ] (or [a] like anakat and mattpsy California), in the UK there is [ä] or [a]. 

About "language", the /æ/ tensing regards /m, n/ while in almost all accents in the US, /æ/ before /ng/ is not raised (except in Eastern New England). 



mexerica feliz said:


> Do not pronounce flush as flash, and flash as flesh!



I pronounce "flush" [ʌ] (mid-back mid-open), "flash" [a] (mid-front, open) and "flesh" [ɛ] or [e̞], pronounce every "r" and have the cot-caught merger.  (my reference is a Canadian-Californian accent, i.e one of those with few vowels). 



mexerica feliz said:


> It is funny, in Italian they pronounce _cover _(of a song) with an [o],and _club _with an [e].



But "club" with [ɛ] is a loanword (like your [klubi]).  

Anyway, if Italian professors were to make some little adjustment (introducing the difference between bat [ɛ] and bet [e], bot [ɔ] and bought [o], and teaching the Australian-type diphthongs) they would teach the Australian accent (we just say but [ä] and bit _). They could do so or start teaching English or American pronunciation or keep teaching "Italian English" _


----------



## sumelic

The information about these two types of vowel systems in English is very interesting! I did realize how many different vowels were involved in it.


Nino83 said:


> About "language", the /æ/ tensing regards /m, n/ while in almost all accents in the US, /æ/ before /ng/ is not raised (except in Eastern New England).


Hmm... I had forgotten about this pattern, and actually I don't think I've ever been in an area with one of these accents. Is it only for /ŋg/, or all /ŋ/ ? I guess there aren't so many words with /æŋg/... but they are still fairly common, like anger, language, tangle, jangle. Personally, I'm from California but I have tense /æ/ in all places before a nasal, and lax /æ/ in all other places. I had heard that some speakers have a different type of tense /æ/ before /ŋ/ than the one they have before  /m, n/: the pre-/ŋ/ variant is supposed to be a closing diphthong, like [æɪ] or even [eɪ] (I think it can technically "merge" with the /eɪ/ phoneme because there is no preexisting /eɪ/ before /ŋ/, just like some speakers have phonological /i/ before /ŋ/ in place of /ɪ/.)

When I first came to Minnesota, the main difference I noticed with a-tensing was that besides occurring before /ŋ/, it occurs before /g/ as well as for some speakers, like in the words "rag" and "bag".

So I think a-tensing before /ŋ/ is fairly common. I looked at this Wikipedia article, and it has a chart where it only shows tensing before /m/,/n/, but a footnote where it simply states that before /ŋ/ it is "between [æŋ] and [eɪŋ]" for "nearly all American English speakers". (That's actually not very informative , but I think it's trying to say that it is somewhat tensed, but not all the way to /eɪ/ for most speakers.)


----------



## Nino83

sumelic said:


> When I first came to Minnesota, the main difference I noticed with a-tensing was that besides occurring before /ŋ/, it occurs before /g/ as well as for some speakers, like in the words "rag" and "bag".



Yes, /æ/ is raised, progressively, before /b, g, d/ but in Canada the order is /b, d, g/ (/æg/ is higher than /æd/). 
In Minnesota it is a diphthong. 



sumelic said:


> So I think a-tensing before /ŋ/ is fairly common. I looked at this Wikipedia article, and it has a chart where it only shows tensing before /m/,/n/, but a footnote where it simply states that before /ŋ/ it is "between [æŋ] and [eɪŋ]" for "nearly all American English speakers". (That's actually not very informative , but I think it's trying to say that it is somewhat tensed, but not all the way to /eɪ/ for most speakers.)



http://forum.wordreference.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=15042&d=1422029580 

As you can see from that chart (from Labov, 2006) in almost all North American accents , /æ/ before /ng/ is lower than before /n, m/. 
The only two accents where they are similar are Eastern New England and California (but they are different in quality, because in Eastern New England /æ/ before /n, m, ng/ is [eə], higher than Californian [ɛə]). 
In all these accents /æ/ is a little rised before /b, g, d/ but it is lower than before /n, m/, i.e it is still an [æ] (only in Canada /æg/ can be even higher than /æn/, because in Canada /æ/ tensing before nasals is smaller).


----------



## sumelic

Thanks for the link! I didn't realize the pattern of raising was so gradient... It's a good reminder of how much IPA representations of a vowel are a simplification of the phonetic picture.
To me, it looks like we can divide NA dialects into 3 categories according to this chart with regard to raising before /ŋ/:

1. /æ/ before /ŋ/ less tense than in /æn/, /æm/ and before at least one voiced oral consonant
-South
-Inland North
-Mid-Atlantic
-NYC

2./æ/ before /ŋ/ is less tense than in /æn/, /æm/, but more tense than /æ/ before any oral consonant
-W. Pa
-Midland

-Canada (if we ignore the outlier /æg/)

3./æ/ before /ŋ/ more tense than in /æn/, /æm/
-Eastern New England
-West

Is it known what the phonetic trigger for this raising is? With regard to MOA effects, it looks like the raising often occurs in positions where allophonic vowel lengthening is also favored. For the POA effects, I guess coronals tend to be associated with higher vowels.


----------



## Nino83

sumelic said:


> Is it known what the phonetic trigger for this raising is? With regard to MOA effects, it looks like the raising often occurs in positions where allophonic vowel lengthening is also favored. For the POA effects, I guess coronals tend to be associated with higher vowels.



Yes. Voiced consonants and, among them, coronals. 
Labov divides North American dialects in: 
- nasal system: Eastern New England, where /æn/ are much more high than /æ/ before voiced consonants 
- progressive systems: /æ/ is raised progressively, Canada and California have lower /æ/ and lower raising, Midland accents (except Cincinnati) have the same system 
- split system: New York city and Mid-Atlantic, /æ/ is raised before nasals, voiced stops and other consonants only in closed syllables 
- static systems, like Northern Cities and Southern accents, where the /æ/ is just raised, even before /p, t, k/ ([e̞ə] in Northern Cities, [ɛɛ] in Southern accents)


----------



## Sepia

Nino83 said:


> Yes. Voiced consonants and, among them, coronals.
> Labov divides North American dialects in:
> - nasal system: Eastern New England, where /æn/ are much more high than /æ/ before voiced consonants
> - progressive systems: /æ/ is raised progressively, Canada and California have lower /æ/ and lower raising, Midland accents (except Cincinnati) have the same system
> - split system: New York city and Mid-Atlantic, /æ/ is raised before nasals, voiced stops and other consonants only in closed syllables
> - static systems, like Northern Cities and Southern accents, where the /æ/ is just raised, even before /p, t, k/ ([e̞ə] in Northern Cities, [ɛɛ] in Southern accents)



Where would you put New Jersey in that system?


----------



## merquiades

Sepia said:


> Where would you put New Jersey in that system?



Jersey is a Mid-Atlantic accent.  This is not at all the same as New York contrary to popular belief.




			
				Nino 83 said:
			
		

> Are you saying that the vowel of "bought" is a diphthong? where?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Merquiades said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And only a length difference between "bot" and "bought"? Without the diphthong?
Click to expand...

 At least in Mid-Atlantic it is.


----------



## merquiades

merquiades said:


> I've noticed for a long time that British pop or rock singers usually sing in American accents and wondered why. It's true there is a huge financial incentive to market to American audiences.  Adele and Amy Winehouse come to mind just off the top of my head.
> 
> By the way, whatever accent Mika is trying to do, he sounds just awful.  I can't stand hearing him.
> 
> Lily Allen's Cockney brogue sounds pretty shocking also.
> Really?  For a long time I didn't even know they were British.


I have yet found another British singer of a different type of music that imitâtes an American accent in her singing.  I'm still trying to figure out why.

Who would think PJ Harvey was from Dorset?


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Adele doesn't sing in an American accent in my view. Most singers sing in a neutral accent that is not readily identifiable as far as I can see.


----------



## merquiades

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Adele doesn't sing in an American accent in my view. Most singers sing in a neutral accent that is not readily identifiable as far as I can see.


Her speaking voice is certainly not American, but I don't find her singing to be remotely Briish sounding


----------



## berndf

merquiades said:


> Her speaking voice is certainly not American, but I don't find her singing to be remotely Briish sounding


No, as Pedro said, it is Mid-Atlantic, i.e. aiming for a pronunciation that neither British not American speakers you strike as "foreign" sounding.


----------



## Messquito

In Taiwan, we are taught American English and an English teacher from the UK may face some problem while teaching ("Teacher, Z is pronounced zee, not zed, you are wrong!"). 
My Malaysian friend told me they are taught British English at school (probably because they were once colonized by the GB).


----------



## Doraemon-

In Spain it is usual and traditional to learn British English, but (US) American English is gaining ground thanks to films and tv shows.
Other dialects such as Australian or Caribbean English are completely unknown.


----------



## Tinska

Here in Argentina all schools teach British English.
Since I was 4 years old, it stayed in my mind to use British spelling. . 
When I saw Dora the Explorer, (here in dubbing, she teaches English) I found it shocking that many Americanisms are used and I was confused with what I was learning in class. 
Last time my teacher was shocked to write *"cookie"* on my primary school test, instead of the beloved *"biscuit"*.
Then with American or Canadian cartoons dubbed into Spanish I saw the American spelling *"Color"* instead of our *"Colour"*, which I doubted in tests on its writing.  I was never taught American English. Everything in my kindergarden and school were British English.


----------



## Ansku89

I don't know about the current situation so this is 10-20 years old information. At that time Finnish school system preferred British English. In school books it started with British English, there were British flags and adventures in London. At least 3rd and 4th grade books (foreign language began in 3rd grade then, at age 8-9) were 100% British English and after that some American English was also introduced, but more as a curiosity. At later stages the situation got more even and in high school we listened to many different accents. My high school teacher had lived in the US and she said it's OK to write either British or American English in exams as long as you're consistent with it.

Outside schools there is one thing that shows some kind of preference for British English. It's relatively common to use flags as symbols for languages, and the flag used as symbol for English language is usually the Great Britain flag, not US flag.


----------

