# Dialects, accents and usage



## Hutschi

Hi,

when I was a very young child, I lived in a village, where they spoke a German dialect. Later I moved to Dresden and my parents used the standard language and they taught me the standard language. When I come to the village, they switch to the standard (with some accent), when a non-dialect speaker attends. They switch to dialect, when they speak to each other.

Is this the normal behavior of dialect speakers, or does it depend on the dialect? (They know that I understand the dialect. But I cannot speak it properly anymore.)

My father speaks dialect when speaking with his sister on telephone, but nether when I attend the conversation. He wanted to avoid that I learn the dialect, but I learned it until we changed the region.

I read in a book, that such things are normal that they switch to standard, when they feel, you do not belong to the group.


----------



## Sallyb36

When I was young I lived in Eastbourne on the South coast of England, and moved up North when I was 9.  My accent when I moved up here was very Southern, so I had to adopt a Northern accent, with much trauma and being ostracised because of my accent.  Now I have a slight Northern accent, but not the accent of the region where I live, so here I'm looked at as a Southerner, and when I go there to visit family I am looked at as a Northerner.  I don't really fit in either place with my accent, but I like it that way.  It is normal to adpot the accent of where you live as an overriding human need is to be accepted amongst your peers.


----------



## LV4-26

Sallyb36 said:


> Now I have a slight Northern accent, but not the accent of the region where I live,


Even though you've been there 34 years (if I'm counting right)?


> Do speakers use dialect when you are a speaker of the standard language?


Some do here. Mostly old people. One of the reasons is that they're the only ones who can speak it really fluently. When we arrived in Normandy, my wife had a conversation with our neighbour, an old Norman lady. My wife didn't understand a word of what she said to her. So she just went nodding her head and saying "yes" and "really?" from time to time.


----------



## Luke Warm

I agree that it is natural to change one's accent/way of speaking when one moves to another place. This is especially evident in children-- I have a nephew who moved with his family from the US to the UK and his accent has changed completely. In fact, he corrects his parents' pronunciation. In adulthood, I think the changes are more subtle, though when I go back to the US, I definitely recognize a specific accent and way of speaking that were "normal" to my ear when I lived there. I still have a good deal of that accent and hear myself speaking the same way at times, but I'm far more conscious of it and have developed more of an unidentifiable American English speech. When I speak German, people will more often ask if I'm French than American.

As for dialects, I have a colleague and also often see people on television who seem practically unable to differentiate between their dialect and standard German. I guess it's difficult for some people to switch away from the dialect that dominates their experience. Still, there are probably many others who are easily able to switch, but as a foreigner, the better a person is able to switch back and forth, the harder it is for me to recognize the distinctions.


----------



## Sallyb36

LV4-26 said:


> *Even though you've been there 34 years *(if I'm counting right)?
> 
> Some do here. Mostly old people. One of the reasons is that they're the only ones who can speak it really fluently. When we arrived in Normandy, my wife had a conversation with our neighbour, an old Norman lady. My wife didn't understand a word of what she said to her. So she just went nodding her head and saying "yes" and "really?" from time to time.



You are counting right, and yes, even though!  Partly because I don't really want to develop a completely Liverpool accent, it can sound really horrible, and also I went to a private school (won a scholarship, not rich parents!!), so we were taught to speak "properly".


----------



## Lemminkäinen

There's not really such a thing as standard Norwegian, as dialects in general have a pretty strong position in society (for instance, one of the largest national channels, TV2, usually broadcast their news with news anchors with Bergen accents). 
(The closest thing to "standard" is the eastern dialect spoken in the Oslo area, which is the closest to written bokmål)

Some decades ago though, the situation was a little different, and people who moved to Oslo from small towns or other parts of the country usually switched to the local dialect.
Nowadays the tendency is rather to keep your own dialect and be proud of it.

My father is from the northern parts and switched when he moved down to Oslo, but he has some traces of it left, and use it when speaking to his siblings over the phone (or in person of course).


----------



## übermönch

I speak a Frk. German dialect and do not switch if the other speaks standard as it's harder to pronounce and it sounds worse anyway  - it usually works the other way round - if it doesn't I first repeat the dialectal phraze hoping the other guy just misheared me. If she still doesn't get what it's about I get *very *disappointed  but do switch to High German ... or just leave. To my experience the people in Munich and Saare acted not differently.


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

I don't know whether this question is one that an American can address in a coherent way.  While there are to be sure dialects in the USA, I don't thik they address anything like the variation in speech habits and the differentiation in social status that Europeans describe.

Still I grew up in New York City and I had a considerable NY accent growing up.  I lost it when I went to school in Washington, and my accent is generally standard American.  I put on the NY speech sometimes, as a joke for my friends - a kind of linguistic slumming, I guess - but aside from that I never talk that way, even when I speak to New Yorkers.


----------



## invictaspirit

We don't have a real dialect (in the true sense of the word) in Kent but we do have a very strong accent.  My wife is from Sussex, which has a far less strong accent.  When I speak to her, I tend subconsciously to moderate my accent.  In formal sitations I do the same, as well as when I am teaching in school.  But...when talking to an old friend, or my sister or brother, or anyone local who also speaks with a strong accent, I lapse into it.


----------



## Frank78

Hello everyone

I´d like to know how in your countries dialects and accents are being accepted by other speakers. So is it something positive or are the people being critised for using variations apart from the standard language?

In Germany almost everybody speaks (or could speak) in a dialect/with an accent. Our standard language ("High German") is used on TV, radio and among speakers who barely would understand each other if they both  speak in their own dialect. There are even a few programmes on TV exclusivly broadcasted in dialectical speak.

The people are divided on that topic. I think the majority considers dialects/accents as a good element of culture and as expression of regional "patriotism". There are even some clubs which promote rare dialects. 
People even divide accents in how they sound, so there are good and bad ones. Saxonian for example is considered not sounding well. 
On the other hand some people think that dialects/accents are just used by less educated people.

Another phenomen I experienced is that people from the country usually have heavier accents and they are less willing to use standard language even if they know the other doesn´t understand much.


----------



## Kevin Beach

The Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) commented "*No Englishman can open his mouth without causing another Englishman to despise him*".

It isn't quite as true as it was in Shaw's day, but there is still prejudice against both regional and class accents among some people in Britain*.*

In Wales and Scotland, because of nationalist tendencies, some people have strong feelings against any English accent.

Some southern and northern English tend to be prejudiced against each other's accents.

Some "educated" Britons tend to look down on people with "working class" accents, particularly the London and south-eastern accent.

Some working class people tend to regard those with "educated" speech as arrogant or conceited.

Actually, thinking about it, Shaw might say exactly the same thing if he came back and witnessed what is still going on!


----------



## stevea

I'd have to agree with Kevin Beach for most of it. However there have been attempts to accommodate regional accents on TV and Radio without it descending into "tokenism". Depsite this however, the standard sort of middle class English accent seems to predominate mainly I'd suspect from the plethora of people in prominent positions who have been educated at private schools. 

It is interesting however that some regional accents seem to be favoured in advertising. A gentle "geordie" accent of a speaker born in Newcastle seems to engender trust in the listener for some reason according to the advertisers. 

From my own point of view it's not the regional accents that bother me. These can be located to areas that have their own character and customs. Personally I can't bear listening to the posh accents of the Royal Family and the rest of the upper classes. The sound of these manufactured accents are ghastly to my ears.


----------



## Frank78

Thanks for merging the Threads, Hutschi.  "I don't know whether this question is one that an American can address in a coherent way. While there are to be sure dialects in the USA, I don't thik they address anything like the variation in speech habits and the differentiation in social status that Europeans describe"  That´s not true for all of Europe, I would even say class related accents are a typical British phenomenon. In Germany accent are among regions not among classes, but better educated people tend (not all do) to speak less dialect/accent but more standard speech, especially in regions with strong feelings for their customs and traditions (Swabian, Bavarian people)


----------



## federicoft

Local dialects in Italy are usually restricted to informal settings, i.e. at home, amongst friends, sometimes on the street or to do business in a not so formal way.

In formal situations or when talking to people from other regions, it's customary to switch to the standard language, although most people do retain their accent. Standard Italian is the only language used by media and in schools, too (except some regions where the local language was declared official). 
Some people, especially old people in the country, are fluent only in their dialects, and there is definitely a strong social stigma associated with this.


----------



## Kevin Beach

stevea said:


> ......From my own point of view it's not the regional accents that bother me. These can be located to areas that have their own character and customs. Personally I can't bear listening to the posh accents of the Royal Family and the rest of the upper classes. The sound of these manufactured accents are ghastly to my ears.


I think you've just proved Shaw's point, stevea!   

Why are the accents of the "upper classes" (whatever they are) any more manufactured than any other accents? What is "ghastly" about them?

This is our problem in Britain, particularly in England. We are irrationally prejudiced against each other because of attributes that have nothing whatsoever to do with an individual's quality.


----------



## stevea

Kevin Beach said:


> I think you've just proved Shaw's point, stevea!
> 
> Why are the accents of the "upper classes" (whatever they are) any more manufactured than any other accents? What is "ghastly" about them?
> 
> This is our problem in Britain, particularly in England. We are irrationally prejudiced against each other because of attributes that have nothing whatsoever to do with an individual's quality.


 
If you hear a Liverpool accent for example, you know that this is a result of something that has arisen from living in that area. There is absolutely nowhere in the UK where accents as used by the Queen and others of upper classes exist as natural regional accents. They are products of elocution lessons and other actions designed to wipe out the traces of "common accents". This is why they sound ridiculous to me.


----------



## Frank78

stevea said:


> If you hear a Liverpool accent for example, you know that this is a result of something that has arisen from living in that area. There is absolutely nowhere in the UK where accents as used by the Queen and others of upper classes exist as natural regional accents. They are products of elocution lessons and other actions designed to wipe out the traces of "common accents". This is why they sound ridiculous to me.



Isn´t Queensenglish the same as RP? If so then you also hear it on TV,radio and by people living in the south east.


----------



## stevea

Frank 78 - Absolutely not. I'm not talking about grammar etc just the actual accent which to my ears and many others, cannot be identified as belonging to an actual town or region. Look at SallyB's reply further up where she relates her experience at a private school. Despite what people like myself may think, there are many people who find regional accents to be unsophisticated and therefore need correction by elocution teachers. In the past this process has also been used on actors who had strong regional accents. Richard Burton had to have his Welsh accent toned down. These days however, actors don't seem to have this problem.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

In Sweden, the situation is similar to Norway, in that there is no stigma attached to having a 'non-standard' dialect among adults, and most people seem to bring their accents with them when moving to another part of the country, unless they're kids who get teased at school, in which case they'll switch to the new one PDQ.

On TV nowadays you can speak with whichever accent you like, within reason, which was certainly not true 50 years ago, when the media standard was an accent based on, but not exactly like, the Stockholm accent. Even in 1969 the general public wasn't ready for local dialects, and complained demanding subtitles for speech in faraway dialects.

My own dialect, Scanian, is quite different from the other Swedish dialects, particularly the pronunciation, intonation and prosody, but the syntax and vocabulary is mainly standard Swedish. My daughter, who moved to Stockholm a couple of years ago (at 20) has retained our accent out of pride, and tells amusing anecdotes about Stockholmers going Huh? at her, to which we've had endless giggles!  

My ideas about English accents changed dramatically once I went to live in the UK. While before, I regarded RP or the Queen's English as 'nice' and of course easily understandable, I was conditioned in the UK to think of it as 'posh', and negative, just like stevea describes it. If I remember correctly, when there is a 'nasal' sound to it, it sounds particularly 'posh'.

/Wilma


----------



## stevea

Very interesting post Wilma and surprising for me to find a parallel in Sweden. 

There was a programme on TV a few years back where a reporter (Ray Gosling - sadly missed) went to interview members of the upper classes. Some in the UK like to pretend that class is disappearing but the interviewees were in no doubt about it. Even those who were not rich having fallen on hard times, clung to the pride of their background. One woman said she could spot a member of the aristocracy anywhere by the way they pronounced the word "off" which she spoke as "orf". For her the accent was a sign of breeding. Without it, no matter what your wealth, you were lower class.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

stevea said:


> "orf"


Spot on, nose in the air!  I think the Swedes have done away with most class distinctions after so many decades of social democracy, and I am not aware of any 'aristocratic' Swedish accent that exists today, but then I don't get to speak to them a great deal... The Swedish Royal family don't sound different from ordinary people except our Queen, who still has a German accent even after 30+ years in Sweden....

/Wilma


----------



## Kevin Beach

stevea said:


> If you hear a Liverpool accent for example, you know that this is a result of something that has arisen from living in that area. There is absolutely nowhere in the UK where accents as used by the Queen and others of upper classes exist as natural regional accents. They are products of elocution lessons and other actions designed to wipe out the traces of "common accents". This is why they sound ridiculous to me.


I disagree that accents are always regional. RP is widespread and is perfectly natural because children have had it from their parents. It has been around in one form or another for over 200 years.

Even among regional accents, there are the "educated" and uneducated" versions.

The queen speaks like her parents and grandparents did. Her speech isn't the product of special training. However, if you compare her vowel sounds now with those that she had as a young woman, she has obviously made a deliberate effort to "commonise" her own speech, no doubt because of the bigotry of inverted snobs.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Kevin Beach said:


> The queen speaks like her parents and grandparents did. Her speech isn't the product of special training. However, if you compare her vowel sounds now with those that she had as a young woman, she has obviously made a deliberate effort to "commonise" her own speech, no doubt because of the bigotry of inverted snobs.


Isn't it feasible that it's the other way round, i.e. that in the early days she was told to put on a 'special accent' for public speeches whereas now she needn't bother, and her speech today his her normal everyday way of speaking?

/Wilma


----------



## miguel64086

In South America we have very different accent in the different countries... I would not call it dialects, but we do have different words for certain things and our slang is different too...  So, living in the US, I find myself speaking a very "neutral Spanish" with other latinos, but I still keep my "chilenismos" with family and friends from home.
It's natural to do so. It helps the communication process.


----------



## stevea

Wilma_Sweden said:


> Isn't it feasible that it's the other way round, i.e. that in the early days she was told to put on a 'special accent' for public speeches whereas now she needn't bother, and her speech today his her normal everyday way of speaking?
> 
> /Wilma


This is my view of it. Another example can be seen from the difference in the accents of the queen's children. Charles (the eldest) sounds like his father whereas the younger sons sound far more like other RP English speakers. I don't think inverted snobbery had any bearing on it. Times change. 

Listen to the old broadcasts from the BBC and compare them with what you hear now. As long as the accent is understandable then you are likely to find an example in the BBC. The link below was quite interesting. John Wells who is mentioned in it is an interesting man not least for his expertise in Esperanto.

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/dec/22/news/mn-3366


----------



## Basaloe

Okey Wilma you are true the royal family does speak somewhat like normal stockholm-people, but i would guess their "overclass-accent" takes over at the dinner-table.

Of course there are class differencies among dialects in Sweden. I live in Stockholm and have a pretty "urban" dialect. In my work I meet many people from the rich parts of stockholm and the difference is huge although we come from the same city.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Basaloe said:


> Of course there are class differencies among dialects in Sweden. I live in Stockholm and have a pretty "urban" dialect. In my work I meet many people from the rich parts of stockholm and the difference is huge although we come from the same city.


Thanks for the input. We all know our local dialects better than anyone else's.

/Wilma


----------



## El intérprete

miguel64086 said:


> In South America we have very different accent in the different countries... I would not call it dialects, but we do have different words for certain things and our slang is different too...  So, living in the US, I find myself speaking a very "neutral Spanish" with other latinos, but I still keep my "chilenismos" with family and friends from home.
> It's natural to do so. It helps the communication process.



Miguel's right.  In Chile there are several different versions of Spanish.  The two categories of people that stand out are "cuicos" (people with money) and "gente flaite" (people who speak very informal Spanish and usually vulgar).  Standard Spanish that I hear every day in Santiago is somewhere in between.  The intonation is what distinguishes a Chilean from me, along with my appearance.  pooorfa, sííí po.  That sort of thing is hard for me to imitate, but I try! 



			
				Thomas F. O'Gara said:
			
		

> I don't know whether this question is one that an American can address in a coherent way. While there are to be sure dialects in the USA, I don't think they address anything like the variation in speech habits and the differentiation in social status that Europeans describe.
> 
> Still I grew up in New York City and I had a considerable NY accent growing up. I lost it when I went to school in Washington, and my accent is generally standard American. I put on the NY speech sometimes, as a joke for my friends - a kind of linguistic slumming, I guess - but aside from that I never talk that way, even when I speak to New Yorkers.


Thomas is right.  In the US, a person's English is not much of an indication of their social class.  Someone who speaks perfect English may be a pauper.  In rural areas English tends to be less formal, but that doesn't mean that people are poor by any means!

Accents rapidly change in the US depending on the location.  I grew up in a city with a pretty standard accent, but when I see my grandparents in the country, I relax a bit and say Whacha been doin' (What have you been doing?) and stuff like that.  I don't recommend that kind of language, but if I actually pronounce perfectly "What have you been doing?", it is somehow less personal.  I don't know how to explain it.


----------



## stevea

So far a lot of the discussion on this thread relates to the perceived value of having a "cultured" accent and the status that derives from it. There is another strand to this discussion that relates to popular culture or what might be called "street cred". There has been a tendency over the years for singers in the UK to try to pretend that they have American accents when singing certain styles of music. It's always made me laugh when I think of someone from Yorkshire trying to sound like they have come from California. I've also noticed some people trying to adopt a London accent when they have moved there from less urbanised areas.


----------



## Frank78

stevea said:


> So far a lot of the discussion on this thread relates to the perceived value of having a "cultured" accent and the status that derives from it. There is another strand to this discussion that relates to popular culture or what might be called "street cred". There has been a tendency over the years for singers in the UK to try to pretend that they have American accents when singing certain styles of music. It's always made me laugh when I think of someone from Yorkshire trying to sound like they have come from California. I've also noticed some people trying to adopt a London accent when they have moved there from less urbanised areas.



I noticed that as well, but I think this is not THAT new. Neither Phil Collins or Mick Jagger sing a British English "can´t" (a : ) Or is there any regional accent using the American "can´t" (ae).


----------



## stevea

Frank78 - you've pointed out a very curious example with Mick Jagger. Someone from a fairly middle class background whom I would have expected to have spoken in a far more orthodox manner. For some reason he needs to tone down his accent to include not only American drawl but he added some cockney stuff to it as well. 

Imitating Americans isn't new I'd agree. I can't think of anywhere in the UK where your example would be part of the natural accent.


----------



## Outsider

The reason why those English singers have some features of an American accent may be simply because the kind of music they sing originated in America, and they tend to unconsciously imitate the voice of their (American) idols.


----------



## El intérprete

stevea said:


> So far a lot of the discussion on this thread relates to the perceived value of having a "cultured" accent and the status that derives from it. There is another strand to this discussion that relates to popular culture or what might be called "street cred". There has been a tendency over the years for singers in the UK to try to pretend that they have American accents when singing certain styles of music. It's always made me laugh when I think of someone from Yorkshire trying to sound like they have come from California. I've also noticed some people trying to adopt a London accent when they have moved there from less urbanised areas.


In the United States, having an English accent is about the most feminine thing a guy can have in early school years.  I'd hate to be English and move to the US at a young age.  Not that there's anything wrong with England, but the accent is definitely not cool in public schools.  The abuse would be constant, at least in the schools I went to.  I don't know what the case is in London, but the people you mention may just be trying to fit in.


----------



## stevea

El intérprete said:


> In the United States, having an English accent is about the most feminine thing a guy can have in early school years. I'd hate to be English and move to the US at a young age. Not that there's anything wrong with England, but the accent is definitely not cool in public schools. The abuse would be constant, at least in the schools I went to. I don't know what the case is in London, but the people you mention may just be trying to fit in.


 
This is another interesting observation. Is it just English accents or do all British accents carry the same social burden? 

One small comment, the point I made about people copying London accents was not just for people fitting in when they moved into a new location, I've seen it being used to make a person stand out in their original location.


----------



## stevea

Outsider said:


> The reason why those English singers have some features of an American accent may be simply because the kind of music they sing originated in America, and they tend to unconsciously imitate the voice of their (American) idols.


 
I'd say most people would agree with you. It's odd though that accent plays a part in it. Having said that there seems to be a type of accent that is very commonly used by British folk singers. I don't know how to describe it exactly but if you've listened to traditional folk music then you'll know what I mean. To my ears, this accent often sounds a bit exagerated  at times.


----------



## Hulalessar

stevea said:


> ...there seems to be a type of accent that is very commonly used by British folk singers. I don't know how to describe it exactly but if you've listened to traditional folk music then you'll know what I mean. To my ears, this accent often sounds a bit exagerated at times.


 
Richard Stilgoe made the observation that such an accent was used by folk singers "to hide their grammar school accents".

Except when necessitated so that you can be understood, changing an accent seems to be all about social acceptability and it operates in both directions. It is a bit like wearing the right clothes.

Although it may operate in both directions it is of course the case that it is usually the one with the non-prestige accent who changes it. It is more or less obligatory if you want to be taken seriously. It should not be the case, but it is. However liberal one is it is not easy to get rid of one's prejudices completely. I am always going to find two people discussing Kant in a non-prestige accent amusing despite myself. Which of us would feel really confident about taking advice from a lawyer who did not speak with a prestige accent? We expect him/her to have a prestige accent just as we expect him/her to be suitably dressed.


----------



## stevea

Hulalessar said:


> I am always going to find two people discussing Kant in a non-prestige accent amusing despite myself. Which of us would feel really confident about taking advice from a lawyer who did not speak with a prestige accent? We expect him/her to have a prestige accent just as we expect him/her to be suitably dressed.


 
Unfortunately, all too true, I would have to agree.


----------



## El intérprete

stevea said:


> This is another interesting observation. Is it just English accents or do all British accents carry the same social burden?
> 
> One small comment, the point I made about people copying London accents was not just for people fitting in when they moved into a new location, I've seen it being used to make a person stand out in their original location.


I'd say they all carry the same social burden.  I mean, not all people are that mean, but if you go around saying,

Hello, mate.
Please queue up at the box office.
We have to sit an exam in a fortnight.
My father drives a lorry.
Pay attention to the lollipop man.

then people will make fun of you.  Now, I'm sure not everyone in England talks like that by any means.  But words and names like "mate, queue, fortnight, lorry, lollipop man" will make people laugh.  Have you ever seen Flight of the Conchords?  They are from New Zealand, but still get made fun of and are thought to be English at times.


----------



## Orpington

El intérprete said:


> I'd say they all carry the same social burden.  I mean, not all people are that mean, but if you go around saying,
> 
> Hello, mate.
> Please queue up at the box office.
> We have to sit an exam in a fortnight.
> My father drives a lorry.
> Pay attention to the lollipop man.
> 
> then people will make fun of you.  Now, I'm sure not everyone in England talks like that by any means.  But words and names like "mate, queue, fortnight, lorry, lollipop man" will make people laugh.  Have you ever seen Flight of the Conchords?  They are from New Zealand, but still get made fun of and are thought to be English at times.



To be honest we do say those things all the time. They are just our words for things, we dont say 'get in line', 'truck' or whatever the american is for lollipop man.

I don't get what's so funny about fortnight. But I do have to admit lollipop man sounds funny.

I guess it's the same though when an American kid moves to a school in the UK. Although there were American kids in my school and they didn't get made fun of that harshly, just when they said something that sounded funny to us, like 'duty' (Pronounced doody in the US)


----------



## El intérprete

Orpington said:


> To be honest we do say those things all the time. They are just our words for things, we dont say 'get in line', 'truck' or whatever the american is for lollipop man.
> 
> I don't get what's so funny about fortnight. But I do have to admit lollipop man sounds funny.
> 
> I guess it's the same though when an American kid moves to a school in the UK. Although there were American kids in my school and they didn't get made fun of that harshly, just when they said something that sounded funny to us, like 'duty' (Pronounced doody in the US)


I guess fortnight is not that funny, but it sounds rather elegant.   Lollipop man sounds funny though.  As you said, I bet the situation is similar when an American kid moves to a school in the UK.  I guess you pronounce duty like doo tee.


----------



## Orpington

El intérprete said:


> I guess fortnight is not that funny, but it sounds rather elegant.   Lollipop man sounds funny though.  As you said, I bet the situation is similar when an American kid moves to a school in the UK.  I guess you pronounce duty like doo tee.



Nah more like joo tee. Or where I live joo.ee (like with a glottal stop instead of a T, we don't pronounce our T's in my part of the country)

 But yeah different accents will always sound strange to people who aren't used to them.

Also I don't think we really sound feminine.. they always make english people sound feminine though on TV shows though like Family Guy (I find it hilarious btw). But really we don't sound remotely like that. I've never met anyone that speaks like that anyway.

 If you wanna hear like a normal english accent maybe watch a video of sir alan sugar speaking (I think he's quite representative of a london accent). Or for a northern accent (Manchester) try Liam Gallagher.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Hulalessar said:


> We expect him/her to have a prestige accent just as we expect him/her to be suitably dressed.


That figures: I spoke to an Irish solicitor recently who spoke totally RP without the slightest hint of an Irish accent. He said that an Irish accent simply didn't give enough credibilty in the court room, particularly if the judge had trouble understanding!  

Folk singers certainly need a regional accent of some sort, it just doesn't sound 'right' if you sing 'Whisky in the Jar' in the Queen's English! And talking about celebrities: I've been curious about Amy Winehouse. She sounds more American than English when singing (I think), but her speech sounds definitely London-ish.

/Wilma


----------



## Orpington

Wilma_Sweden said:


> That figures: I spoke to an Irish solicitor recently who spoke totally RP without the slightest hint of an Irish accent. He said that an Irish accent simply didn't give enough credibilty in the court room, particularly if the judge had trouble understanding!
> 
> Folk singers certainly need a regional accent of some sort, it just doesn't sound 'right' if you sing 'Whisky in the Jar' in the Queen's English! And talking about celebrities: I've been curious about Amy Winehouse. She sounds more American than English when singing (I think), but her speech sounds definitely London-ish.
> 
> /Wilma



Yes Amy Winehouse came to mind for me too readin this thread. I think she sings in an American accent because she mostly sings jazzish songs, and a lot of her influence comes from American musicians. Still strange though.


----------



## Hulalessar

Wilma_Sweden said:


> That figures: I spoke to an Irish solicitor recently who spoke totally RP without the slightest hint of an Irish accent. He said that an Irish accent simply didn't give enough credibilty in the court room, particularly if the judge had trouble understanding!


 
I am not convinced it was necessary for him to adopt an RP accent. An Irish accent, whilst not necessarily attracting prestige, does not lack it in England. An Irish accent is considered musical and pleasing to the ear. The English cannot distinguish between the different social and regional accents that exist in Ireland and therefore make no assumptions about the Irish on the basis of the way they speak. The success of the Irish in the broadcasting media is evidence of this.

A Scottish accent is different. A "broad" Scottish accent can be difficult for the English to understand. A more "genteel" accent though definitely has no stigma attached to it and can be taken to be an indication of being well-educated. Scottish doctors and engineers are considered to be almost infallible!


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Hulalessar said:


> I am not convinced it was necessary for him to adopt an RP accent.


Well, since that was the answer I got, I assumed he himself felt the need to acquire a neutral accent, particularly if working outside of Ireland. Presumably, it shouldn't be necessary if you only operated within Ireland, where people are used to the accent. To a foreigner like myself, an Irish accent, like the Scottish one, can be anything from pleasing to totally incomprehensible, depending on how much it deviates from RP.

/Wilma


----------



## Hulalessar

Wilma_Sweden said:


> Well, since that was the answer I got, I assumed he himself felt the need to acquire a neutral accent, particularly if working outside of Ireland.


 
Possibly. The English do tend to think of the Irish as playwrights and poets rather than lawyers.



Wilma_Sweden said:


> Presumably, it shouldn't be necessary if you only operated within Ireland, where people are used to the accent.


 
No, but he might be subject to prejudice if he did not have the "right" Irish accent.



Wilma_Sweden said:


> To a foreigner like myself, an Irish accent, like the Scottish one, can be anything from pleasing to totally incomprehensible, depending on how much it deviates from RP.


 
The same goes for English (i.e. from England) speakers of RP, except that I doubt they have too much trouble understanding anyone with an Irish accent. The reason is the different histories of English in Ireland and Scotland.

The varieties of English spoken in the Lowlands of Scotland (Scots) are a parallel development to the varieties of English spoken in England going back well over a thousand years. Without getting into a discusion about whether Scots is a different language from English, there is a continuum of speech varieties from Scots to Scottish English, with many speakers able to move from one to the other. Apart from that, there is a feeling in Scotland that Scottish English is a distinct variety. In fact, for its size, there are more varieties of English (and without expressing any opinion as to the status of Scots I am of course including it in English) in Southern Scotland than in any other English speaking area of the world. The situation in the Highlands of Scotland is similar to that in Ireland.

English was exported to Ireland by the English and was essentially imposed by them as a colonial power. It did not really start to spread until the 16th century. There is a Gaelic substratum evident to a greater or less extent in some varieties which produces some constructions not found in any other variety of English. There is also a tendency for stress to shift on longer words. Neither of these presents any special impediment to understanding for English (i.e. from England) speakers of RP, though I can see it may do for foreigners.


----------



## Outsider

Wilma_Sweden said:


> To a foreigner like myself, an Irish accent, like the Scottish one, can be anything from pleasing to totally incomprehensible [...]


Oh, it can be both at the same time!


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Outsider said:


> Oh, it can be both at the same time!


That would be subject to personal opinion. I don't find incomprehensible speech pleasing in any context.

I realised that a previous statement I made may have been misunderstood due to flawed grammar:


> To a foreigner like myself, an Irish accent, like the Scottish one, can be anything from pleasing to totally incomprehensible, depending on how much it deviates from RP.


When reading it now, it seems that I'm saying the Scottish accent is a subset of the Irish one, which of course is complete codswallop! What I really meant was: 
_To a foreigner like myself, *an Irish accent, *__*as well as a Scottish one*, can be anything ...

_The main problem is, specifically, vowel sounds that deviate from RP(*), until you figure out the vowel & diphthong system of that particular dialect. Unfamilar stress patterns don't help either. 

/Wilma

(*) I'm using RP as the 'norm' here but of course it applies to whatever is your normal pronunciation pattern, be it UK, American or whatever.


----------



## Hulalessar

Because of my background and education I happen to speak what is referred to, amongst other things, as BBC English. People often tell me that I speak beautifully or that they wish they could speak like me. Whilst one naturally prefers to be admired rather than disparaged, I find this mildly annoying as I am more interested in spreading the idea that all speech varieties are acceptable than in being praised for something I do with out having had to put any effort into doing it.

An interesting experiment was carried out a few years ago. Various varieties of English were recorded and played to Russians who knew no English. They were quite unable to attribute qualities such as "refined", "rural", "ugly" or "beautiful" to any of them.

This strongly suggests that the idea of quality attached to any particular speech variety derives from those who speak it. "The Queen's English" is refined because the Queen speaks it and she is refined. Liverpool and Birmingham accents are considered ugly because those cities are not generally considered desirable places to live. A West Country accent is considered rural because the West Country is largely rural. And so on.

As they say in Provence: _Le français n'est que le patois du roi._


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Hulalessar said:


> An interesting experiment was carried out a few years ago. Various varieties of English were recorded and played to Russians who knew no English. They were quite unable to attribute qualities such as "refined", "rural", "ugly" or "beautiful" to any of them.
> 
> This strongly suggests that the idea of quality attached to any particular speech variety derives from those who speak it. "The Queen's English" is refined because the Queen speaks it and she is refined. Liverpool and Birmingham accents are considered ugly because those cities are not generally considered desirable places to live. A West Country accent is considered rural because the West Country is largely rural. And so on.


It's pretty obvious that you can't begin to distinguish dialects in a language you don't speak. It would have been even more interesting to play those varieties of English to Russians (or any other nationality) that did speak English but never lived in an English-speaking environment. I would argue that they would be able to attribute some qualities, but those qualities would not be consistent with those of native English speakers. 

There is a large and somewhat heated debate going on in a different thread in this forum about the attributes of different Spanish dialects in terms of prestige etc, which illustrates the point beautifully: strong opinions about dialects /accents are mainly delivered by those living in the relevant country/region.

/Wilma


----------



## stevea

Wilma,



> There is a large and somewhat heated debate going on in a different thread in this forum about the attributes of different Spanish dialects in terms of prestige etc, which illustrates the point beautifully: strong opinions about dialects /accents are mainly delivered by those living in the relevant country/region


 
In a way it is somewhat reassuring that this accent issue isn't just a British phenomenon. The point to bear in mind is that the accent is only one way in which we have been conditioned to distinguish between ourselves. There are plenty of others. The problem with accents is that this is often one of the first things you get to know about someone. As soon as that is in the mix, all the other social images are added and an instant evaluation takes place.


----------



## aspar

This a fascinating subject. I don't know if any Flemish speakers have contributed, but in Belgium having and using a dialect without any inferiority or superiority complex is something of a national sport.

Here we have the official ABN (translated as "Generally Civilized Dutch") which is the school, media (BBC equivalent) and written Dutch (called Flemish by the Flemish speaking Belgians and Dutch by the people in the Netherlands). Most of the Flemish Belgians (there are also the French speaking and German speaking Belgians) speak both ABN and their town or regional dialect.

Each of the five Flemish provinces has a separate dialect and every one of their several hundred towns and cities has a separate sub-dialect or at least an accent variation of the provincial capital's dialect. Here we are speaking about true dialects and not just accents. A dialect is a tradition of oral expression which has little or no commonly used written form but has a complete phonetic structure, vocabulary and expressions. It is used by everyone regardless of age or social status and is accepted by the "official" language as a legitimate cultural identity.

In Belgium your dialect defines your identity. National identity is constructed backwards. First you are a "Gentenaar" (someone from the city if Gent), then you are an "Oost Vlaming" (from the province of East Flanders), then you are a "Vlaming" (Flemish, as opposed to a French speaking Walloon from the southern provinces), and finally you are
a Belgian. The history of Flemish dialects is long and tortuous, but today they are very much alive and well. 

When the EU was formed the Flemish Belgians and the Dutch were worried that their "small" language would be bulldozed by the "big" European languages, so they created public and private mechanisms to boost, promote and preserve the dialects. For example, you have a popular TV series with five or six characters, each speaking in a different dialect but with ABN subtitles at the bottom of the screen.
The national language policy has been to respect and promote dialect diversity with the official ABN as a unifying and facilitating mechanism. We have a lighthearted approach to our dialect differences and we joke about those who try to prove cultural "superiority" through language. 

The value and richness of this attitude is shown in an everyday school classroom. The children do their regular ABN class, then go out to play, speaking the local dialect to their friends and read an ABN magazine before going home to speak dialect to their parents. Besides, they have the option of learning at least three other "big" languages from primary school age. Most Belgians speak at least three languages, plus their dialect, quite fluently.


----------



## aspar

I had a very interesting experience with the village dialect of my parents who came from the Flemish part of Belgium where dialects are common and still much used by all agegroups.
Before I was born my parents had already emigrated from Belgium to South Africa. Their non-academic schooling and the separation from their cultural origins did not equip them to transmit properly spoken & written Flemish to their children. They spoke their village dialect to each other at home and gradually learnt the languages spoken in their new country. 
As an adolescent & even later as an adult, I had no memory at all of what language I spoke at home as a pre-school child before the English I learned at school. My mother told me later that my brother and I spoke the Flemish village dialect fluently until age seven when school English took over and dominated. Although I always understood my parent's dialect, my brother & I never spoke it again.
However, when I was about thirty, I moved back to Belgium and stayed with my family there who still spoke the village dialect daily. Within three weeks of total immersion I had recovered all of the dialect which had surely remained in my subconscious all that time.
I don't think I'm an exceptional case. I believe languages or dialects learnt in childhood, even if they were only oral, remain with you forever. 
Rediscovering my "home" dialect was synonymous with rediscovering my entire family I hadn't seen for thirty years. I always encourage people who have other languages or dialects among their family to maintain them if at all possible. We should not accept social pressure to "convert" to a new culture at the cost of losing our language heritage.


----------



## elirlandes

Hulalessar said:


> An Irish accent, whilst not necessarily attracting prestige, does not lack it in England.



I can tell you from experience that while Irish accents are generally accepted in the UK, they are a hindrance in certain prestige jobs. It was certainly my experience working in the City that the typical Public-schoolboy/OxBridge banker would take a little while to warm to an Irish accent, assuming that the Irish-sounding person in the room was either not very clever, or was the more junior person in the room. I used to notice this from those British establishment type employees of Barings, Flemings, Schroeders etc, but not from the more international employees of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan etc.



Hulalessar said:


> The English cannot distinguish between the different social and regional accents that exist in Ireland.



This is certainly true - in part because until relatively recently, accents in Ireland were really geographical in the main, and not socio-economic. Interestingly, in the last 20 years, a number of new socio-economic accents have appeared in Ireland, perhaps resulting from the enormous shifts in the Irish economy over that period. I don't think that the English have worked these out yet though.

Certainly, we can be pidgeon-holed as Irish by the English (which can mean we are generalised as not worthy of prestige roles, see above, or gregarious and fun, see below...) but within the various Irish accents, generally, the English find it nearly impossible to classify us as having "high-status" or "low-status" accents, in the same way that they do their own.

I would suggest that the English have this same issue with English speakers from Australia, New Zealand, the US, Canada, South Africa etc. much to their frustration as they love to work out people's class. While class does exist in these places, it is not as marked as it is in the UK. This can be to the great advantage of non-British english-speaking natives when in the UK, particularly if their accent is not a high status one in their home country. An englishman may look down on a working class Scouser, or an East-end barrow boy because of his accent, but may not recognise someone of similar socio-economic background from Ireland by accent alone.




Hulalessar said:


> The success of the Irish in the *[british] *broadcasting media is evidence of this.


I would say that this success is down to the fact that the British [read: English] see the Irish as gregarious, fun-loving and not to be taken too seriously... This (and the natural musicality of many Irish accents) makes the accent attractive for light entertainment programming. Only Olivia O'Leary has made any headway as a presenter of serious material in the British media...

Note: taken entirely objectively, I would say that there is a subconcious belittlement of the Irish in your own phrasology when you say: "The success of the Irish in thebroadcasting media is evidence of this." Of course, the Irish are very successful in the broadcasting media, IN IRELAND... I don't imagine you would have phrased this sentence the same way had you been referring to another nationality... [try swapping "New Zealanders" for "Irish" in your sentence].

This is not to say that we do not profit from this... I have often been afforded a welcome in England that others may not have had, merely as a result of my accent - an Irish accent can be a great asset to have in the UK.


----------



## effeundici

I live in Tuscany and we don't have a dialect. The language spoken here is classified as a _variant _of Italian. This is due to the fact that standard Italian (simplifying a lot of course) was born (by Dante) and grew up (by Manzoni) in Florence.

On the contrary, our accent is incredibly strong and specifical, it sounds almost incredible to other people in Italy.

One thing to say is that the use of the dialect or the accent in Italy is almost completely unrelated to the social class.


----------



## Hulalessar

elirlandes said:


> It was certainly my experience working in the City that the typical Public-schoolboy/OxBridge banker would take a little while to warm to an Irish accent, assuming that the Irish-sounding person in the room was either not very clever, or was the more junior person in the room.


 
The prejudice was probably because you did not have a public school accent. 




elirlandes said:


> Note: taken entirely objectively, I would say that there is a subconcious belittlement of the Irish in your own phrasology when you say: "The success of the Irish in thebroadcasting media is evidence of this." Of course, the Irish are very successful in the broadcasting media, IN IRELAND... I don't imagine you would have phrased this sentence the same way had you been referring to another nationality...


 
The sentence before the one you quote is: _The English cannot distinguish between the different social and regional accents that exist in Ireland and therefore make no assumptions about the Irish on the basis of the way they speak._ I think it is clear from the context that I am talking about the British broadcasting media.



elirlandes said:


> [try swapping "New Zealanders" for "Irish" in your sentence].


 
_The English cannot distinguish between the different social and regional accents that exist in New Zealand and therefore make no assumptions about New Zealanders on the basis of the way they speak.The success of New Zealanders in the broadcasting media is evidence of this._

I cannot see a difference.


----------



## Judica

There are different accents in the US as well ... depending on region. People in Mid-Western states sound as if they are talking through their noses. People in the Southern states have a definitive drawl, some of it is incomprehensible. People in the Eastern states also have a major accent (ie NYC and Boston). 

It is not an issue of class, simply region.


----------



## El intérprete

Judica said:


> There are different accents in the US as well ... depending on region. People in Mid-Western states sound as if they are talking through their noses. People in the Southern states have a definitive drawl, some of it is incomprehensible. People in the Eastern states also have a major accent (ie NYC and Boston).
> 
> It is not an issue of class, simply region.


Yes, in the US, location plays a larger role than class.  Where I come from it would sound strange to actually say the word "for" like the number four.  It is more common for us to pronounce "for" like "fer" or "fur" .
For example, _This is for you._  To actually pronounce "for" like "four" in that sentence would sound a little odd, but correct.


----------



## Sepia

Wilma_Sweden said:


> That figures: I spoke to an Irish solicitor recently who spoke totally RP without the slightest hint of an Irish accent. He said that an Irish accent simply didn't give enough credibilty in the court room, particularly if the judge had trouble understanding!
> 
> Folk singers certainly need a regional accent of some sort, it just doesn't sound 'right' if you sing 'Whisky in the Jar' in the Queen's English! And talking about celebrities: I've been curious about Amy Winehouse. She sounds more American than English when singing (I think), but her speech sounds definitely London-ish.
> 
> /Wilma




Duffy sounds very American too, more or less like a Southern Accent. And she is Welsh.

Strange thing about the Irish accent - somewhere else in this forum somebody referred to a survey that came up with the result that Irish anchorpeople are very well accepted and understood. If so, why should an Irish accent be less acceptable in court?


----------



## Punk in Drublic

I wish he had a more diverse range of accents in Australia 

The accent is almost homogeneous across the country, despite the large size of the country. There are probably three main discernible accents

* City
* country
* Posh (think Alexander Downer)


----------



## Silvia B

effeundici said:


> I live in Tuscany and we don't have a dialect. The language spoken here is classified as a _variant _of Italian. This is due to the fact that standard Italian (simplifying a lot of course) was born (by Dante) and grew up (by Manzoni) in Florence.
> 
> On the contrary, our accent is incredibly strong and specifical, it sounds almost incredible to other people in Italy.
> 
> One thing to say is that the use of the dialect or the accent in Italy is almost completely unrelated to the social class.




Well, I live in Veneto and WE DO have a strong dialect  I think that here, more than in many other parts of Italy, the dialect is still "alive" and used in everyday life with the majority of people you meet (work, shops, home, with friends...of course if they come from here too )

Dialects in Italy are different from region to region..and from village to village.. I know people who live 10 km far from me and use words I had never heard before in our dialect. 

I sometimes like this and I sometimes don't. I think it's an expression of our culture but at the same time, the accent can be strong (at the ears of people from another region) and this can sometimes be considered a lack of "culture" (?) 

Dialects usually can't be understood by another Italian person, while, as far as I understood, British (or Americans) just have some different "accents". Is that correct?

One weird thing here in Veneto is that it is impossible to speak Italian with someone you know. This is a crazy thing .. let me know if this is common somewhere else too..: fx. I have always used the dialect with my family and close friends, or bf.. and we would never be able to speak Italian to each other, it would just sound too odd! If we do that, it just sounds like a joke. But, on the other hand, I perfectly speak Italian with all other people (some collegues, people I don't know etc). Yet it seems impossible with those I know.


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

Silvia B said:


> Well, I live in Veneto and WE DO have a strong dialect  I think that here, more than in many other parts of Italy, the dialect is still "alive" and used in everyday life with the majority of people you meet (work, shops, home, with friends...of course if they come from here too )
> 
> Dialects in Italy are different from region to region..and from village to village.. I know people who live 10 km far from me and use words I had never heard before in our dialect.
> 
> I sometimes like this and I sometimes don't. I think it's an expression of our culture but at the same time, the accent can be strong (at the ears of people from another region) and this can sometimes be considered a lack of "culture" (?)
> 
> Dialects usually can't be understood by another Italian person, while, as far as I understood, British (or Americans) just have some different "accents". Is that correct?
> 
> One weird thing here in Veneto is that it is impossible to speak Italian with someone you know. This is a crazy thing .. let me know if this is common somewhere else too..: fx. I have always used the dialect with my family and close friends, or bf.. and we would never be able to speak Italian to each other, it would just sound too odd! If we do that, it just sounds like a joke. But, on the other hand, I perfectly speak Italian with all other people (some collegues, people I don't know etc). Yet it seems impossible with those I know.



This is exactly how my family thinks! My grandparents are from Messina (they know both Sicilian & Italian), and if they spoke to each other in Italian it would sound funny and awkward; I don't exactly know how to explain it. But when I talk to them (in Italian) they laugh at me lol. I cannot speak Sicilian, I can just understand .


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

elirlandes said:


> I can tell you from experience that while Irish accents are generally accepted in the UK, they are a hindrance in certain prestige jobs. It was certainly my experience working in the City that the typical Public-schoolboy/OxBridge banker would take a little while to warm to an Irish accent, assuming that the Irish-sounding person in the room was either not very clever, or was the more junior person in the room. I used to notice this from those British establishment type employees of Barings, Flemings, Schroeders etc, but not from the more international employees of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan etc.



I don't doubt this at all. In my experience, Americans generally view our accent(s) as soft, nice or even "cool", whereas many (generally RP-speaking) English pigeonhole it as backward, uneducated etc. I guess this stems from impressions of the Irish portrayed in England throughout much of the 19th and 20th centuries. It seems to be changing now though, on TV channels like Sky News and the BBC, presenters with strong Irish accents can often be heard, something I don't think happened a lot in the past.

I have noticed that when speaking with an Irish accent to foreigners (mainly French) it almost always receives the same reception as Americans give it; soft, musical, cool etc., even if they sometimes mistake it for an American accent  Still, I enjoy teaching my (French) girlfriend Irish expressions like "to give out", "to be after doing something", "what's the story?" etc., strangely, it's only on going abroad that I realize how different our dialect is from BE.

Personally, I'd say that the RTE newsreader accent is perhaps the most "prestigious" one in Ireland but there is nothing on the scale of RP - within reason - you can talk as you want and be accepted by most sectors of society (though there are always some West Brit holdouts ).

In France, things are totally different. The Parisian accent plays a role even more pronounced than RP in England. I've never once heard a newsreader who speaks with a Southern accent. Indeed, there is a popular show called _Plus Belle la Vie_ set in Marseille, and most of the characters speak with Parisian accents. Bizarre, lamentable but true.


----------



## KenInPDX

I have to completely disagree with everyone who said that accent/dialect is not associated with class in the U.S.

For one, thing, regional accents do have varying degrees of prestige - people with Southern accents are often made fun of by people in other parts of the country, and Southern accents are often associated with being a "hick" or with having retrograde social and political views.  Obviously this has nothing to do with the speech per se, but is a sociological phenomenon arising from the long history of conflict between the South and the rest of the country going back to the Civil War and probably long before that.

In general, working-class people speak differently than better-educated people most parts of the country - working-class speakers are more likely to use non-standard grammar, as well as to use certain pronunciations.  I also have the sense that in many parts of the country, less-educated people are more likely to have a strong regional accent, perhaps because they are less likely to have spent time in other parts of the country.  I grew up in the Chicago area which does have a recognizable accent.  When I went to college outside of Philadelphia, most of the students were from the Northeast and made fun of the way I talked so I made a conscious effort to lose my accent.  My partner tells me that it comes out sometimes, especially when I'm angry or expressing another strong emotion (something I've noticed in other people that I know who have tried to lose an accent).

I'm rambling a bit, but I find this to be a fascinating topic.  I've also found that accents can be a way of bonding with people, and are often used as an icebreaker, especially in groups of people who don't know each well, where there are people from all different parts of the country.

Once when I was living in California I was in a bar and went up to the bar to order a drink. A guy sitting at the other end yells over at me - "Hey are you from Chicago?"  I said "Yes, how did you know?"  He laughed and said it was obvious from my accent.  So I guess I wasn't as successful at losing it as I thought.

Finally, I wanted to point out that while U.S. English may not have dialectal differences that are as pronounced as some European countries, we have at least one "true dialect" (whatever that is exactly) and that is African-American english (also know as Black English, Black English Vernacular, or Ebonics).  Black English has unique grammatical features, many words in its vocubulary that do not exist at all in standard English as well as many unique slang terms and expressions, and very different pronunciation and intonation than standard English.  I have been in situations where I've overheard black people speaking to each other and truly did not understand a thing they were saying.  Sadly, many ignorant people in this country think that black speech merely reflects a lack of intelligence and education, but that is not at all true.  Black English is no less "valid" or "correct" than any other dialect or language.  While as a practical matter, people do need to learn the standard language of their country in order to be fully accepted in the workplace and in elite educational institutions, from a linguistic perspective there is no basis whatsoever for declaring one dialect or accent to be the sole correct one, or to be "better" than another one.  As others in the discussion have said, any value judgments about an accent or dialect are really sociological.


----------



## xjm

I agree strongly with everything KeninPDX has said.  

There are definitely distinct dialects in AE, differentiated not only by accent/phonetics but also by word choice and even grammar, especially in rural areas.  These dialects can be difficult for a standard speaker to understand.  There is also definitely stigmatization of less standard dialects.  The more rural it is, the more stigmatized it tends to be.

For a long time, I would adopt a Southern accent if I wanted to do an impression of an ignoramus.  I didn't even realize I was doing it, or how bigoted it was, until well into my college career.

It's probably the worst for AAVE speakers, because people's linguistic prejudices get tangled up with their racial prejudices.  I constantly hear whites, teenagers especially but adults as well, parroting and making fun of AAVE, even in a very "politically correct" city.  

Primary and secondary schools only make it worse by constantly calling features of AAVE "bad English" or "bad grammar."  I can remember elementary school teachers actually making fun of black students' pronunciations in front of the whole class.  A student would say "Can I ask you something?" (with ask pronounced "aks") and the teacher would say, "Please don't axe me."  Or a teacher would repeat something the student said and exaggerate the accent.  Or mock the use of "ain't."   That sort of thing.  This wasn't 50 years ago or something; this was in the late 80s.

Edit: I'd also point out that the definition of "dialect" is a bit fuzzy and many people prefer to think of dialect continuums, with slight regional variations at one end and mutually unintelligible languages at the other.  If I had to guess, Europe has more entrenched variations and higher "dialect density" because of the longer history of specific linguistic/ethnic/cultural identities there.

I'd go so far to say that AAVE may be more distinct from the standard American dialect than, say, spoken Hindi and Urdu are from each other.   And those are politically/culturally classified as separate _languages_.  So a lot depends on cultural context.


----------



## xjm

stevea said:


> This is another interesting observation. Is it just English accents or do all British accents carry the same social burden?



Forgive us, we conflate "British" with "English" sometimes.  

In my assessment, most Americans can distinguish three categories of accents from the British Isles: Irish, Scottish, and everything else we'd simply call English or (forgive me) British.  Welsh accents might be confused with Irish.

A child's Irish or Scottish accent might be the target of some teasing, but the "English" category has a particular connotation of snobbery or sissiness for many Americans.  (Nowadays a kid with an English accent would also inevitably get called "Harry Potter" as well.)   I'm not exactly sure why this is, but it probably has something to do with prep schools.


----------



## Jacobtm

I know a white guy who grew up in Detroit, which is over 90% black, and he of course grew up speaking like his peers. He'd moved to a white area of Arkansas, and he had to change his speech quite a bit, because everyone was so confused as to why he was "talking black". For instance, he didn't quite realize that using "yank" in place of "steal" wasn't universally understood.

While different than dialects which have their roots in centuries of history, the USA does have a LOT of variation in language, based alot more on socioeconomic factors than geography in many cases. Frequently people who grow up poor have a very hard time speaking "proper english", and need shockingly basic help in practically all areas of normative language, though I suppose that's universal.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

xjm said:


> but the "English" category has a particular connotation of snobbery or sissiness for many Americans.  (Nowadays a kid with an English accent would also inevitably get called "Harry Potter" as well.)   I'm not exactly sure why this is, but it probably has something to do with prep schools.



Such treatment certainly isn't a phenomenon specific to Americans. It's most likely due to the fact that the English are very concerned with the social class system and one's place within it, or at least that's how it's perceived abroad. The standard "English accent" that foreigners recognize, RP, is almost only associated with the upper classes.

I don't think any kid speaking with a heavy Scouse accent for example would ever be considered posh or snobby, quite the opposite in fact.


----------



## Sepia

Sometimes Italians say "dialect" when they actually mean "regional language" - that is a political thing, right?


----------



## federicoft

Sepia said:


> Sometimes Italians say "dialect" when they actually mean "regional language" - that is a political thing, right?



Hardly so. Most people call them dialects simply because they think they are dialects. They are absolutely unaware they could be considered languages on their own right. 

There are few to no political implications for using that term. Even the Northern League autonomist party, which is the staunchest supporter of dialects/regional languages in Parliament, calls them that way. I have no opinion about which is the most correct way of calling those idioms, but since there are not official definitions of what constitues a language and what doesn't, no one can say calling them dialects is wrong.

Exceptions are of course regional languages that were made official by law, such as Friulian and Sardinian, and obviously German, French and Slovenian. Nobody calls these languages "dialects" anyway.


----------



## xjm

federicoft said:


> Hardly so. Most people call them dialects simply because they think they are dialects. They are absolutely unaware they could be considered languages on their own right.
> 
> There are few to no political implications for using that term. Even the Northern League autonomist party, which is the staunchest supporter of dialects/regional languages in Parliament, calls them that way. I have no opinion about which is the most correct way of calling those idioms, but since there are not official definitions of what constitues a language and what doesn't, no one can say calling them dialects is wrong.
> 
> Exceptions are of course regional languages that were made official by law, such as Friulian and Sardinian, and obviously German, French and Slovenian. Nobody calls these languages "dialects" anyway.



Ah, thank you.  I was wondering about this as well; as I learned it, if speaker A cannot understand speaker B's language and/or vice versa, they are actually fully separate languages.

So, in the original post, is the same true of the so-named German dialects mentioned?  Or are these mutually intelligible dialects?


----------



## Lupen The Third

Hello people! Since the moment this thread is called "Dialects, accents and usage", I would like to say something about my second "language".

I live in the south of Italy and my dialect is called "napulitan".
But "Napoletano" is more than a dialect... in the past it was the official language of the "Regno di Napoli" (the acient reign of Italy,  XIII al XIX c).
Today "Napoletano" is consider a proper language as well as "Sicilian" and "Sardinian" and it is famous in the whole world also thanks to some masterpieces, like:
'O sole mio" and  'O surdato 'nnammurato".

This dialect/language marks a lot your way of speaking, but not to the 100%.
In formal events I would use Italian language, but with my friends or in some shops, I could use "Napoletano" with no problems.

With my family I use Italian or "Napoletano", it depends if I am joking or I'm telling important things.

Today "Napoletano", as I said before, is consider a proper language and it is very very very far from the Italian language. It is a mix of French, English, Latin, Arabic, Spanish and acient Greek; with a little bit of Portuguese, German.

And that's all!Thank you,
Lupen The Third


----------



## stevea

I wonder if part of the difficulty is related to the way we try to learn languages. I can't think of a text book or audio book that would recommend that we learn English in say a Yorkshire vernacular. This makes us think there is only one way to speak these languages. I remember a friend of mine working in Holland a few years ago who was taught the language by his co-workers. He found however that going a few miles down the road and he was having difficulties. This is the issue really, we need some sort of common set of rules that will help us get by.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Scots is considered a separate language by some, and just non-standard English by others - including many of its "native" speakers. In Northern Ireland some try and pass off a further dialect of Scots - Ulster-Scots - as _another_ separate language, mostly in an attempt to gain cultural parity with the Irish language. Many if not most people laugh this off, but there are a remarkable number who are attached to it, not all of whom are extremists.

In many cases what separates a language from a dialect is dominated by solely political concerns.


----------



## xjm

Regarding the original question of whether it is "normal" to switch your dialect based on whom you are speaking to and where, I believe this is very normal; in fact, I'd go so far to say that it's an instinctive part of human behavior, probably to make ourselves better understood.  Most people adjust their speech to more closely match that of the person they are speaking with.  

It goes beyond simple sociolinguistic registers, in my experience.  I've overheard my mother switch into a dialect associated with more rural, blue collar communities when talking to a repairman who had this dialect.  She didn't even realize she had done so.

Part of the difficulty for Americans is that we're not taught about the different variations of AE as children; we're often taught that there's only one "proper English."  At best, we learn about "accents," even though there's more than merely accent in play.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

xjm said:


> It goes beyond simple sociolinguistic registers, in my experience.  I've overheard my mother switch into a dialect associated with more rural, blue collar communities when talking to a repairman who had this dialect.  She didn't even realize she had done so.



I do that regularly too, in fact I think everyone does - mostly without realizing it.

In college or other high-brow circles the use of "Irishisms" like "I do be", "amn't", "what's the story" etc. would be frowned upon but if talking to your neighbour or others who speak the same register it would almost be demanded, or at least seen as downright strange if you did not.


----------



## ernest_

Sepia said:


> Sometimes Italians say "dialect" when they actually mean "regional language" - that is a political thing, right?



I was going to say the same thing about Germans 
From what I read here and elsewhere it looks like many German "dialects" are not mutually intelligible. But aren't two dialects of the same language mutually intelligible *by definition*? Then we shouldn't be speaking of dialects but of full-fledged languages.


----------



## federicoft

ernest_ said:


> But aren't two dialects of the same language mutually intelligible *by definition*



I'd say no.
The most important factors are socio-linguistic ones, i.e. whether language A is used independently from language B or not. In case they are not used independently, that is they have a diglossia relationship, it is very unlikely they would be considered separate languages, even if they are not always mutually intelligible. Examples are dialects of German, Italian or Arabic.
On the other hand, two very close and mutually intelligible languages can be considered separate languages, if they are used independently from each other. Examples are Serbian vs. Croatian, Afrikaans vs. Dutch, Hindi vs. Urdu.


----------



## xjm

federicoft said:


> I'd say no.
> The most important factors are socio-linguistic ones, i.e. whether language A is used independently from language B or not. In case they are not used independently, that is they have a diglossia relationship, it is very unlikely they would be considered separate languages, even if they are not always mutually intelligible. Examples are dialects of German, Italian or Arabic.
> On the other hand, two very close and mutually intelligible languages can be considered separate languages, if they are used independently from each other. Examples are Serbian vs. Croatian, Afrikaans vs. Dutch, Hindi vs. Urdu.



Well, the words *dialect *and *language* have specific definitions in linguistics (edit: in the linguistics I was taught, anyway; I can hardly speak for a profession that isn't mine), but social and political definitions often differ.  I like your point about diglossia, however; it explains some of the patterns in how people perceive the relationship between their dialect or language and others.  Previously I guess I'd assumed it was always a matter of political identity or simply confusion when the term was (from the linguistics perspective) misapplied.

There is also the unfortunate fact that the word *dialect* itself has a negative connotation to many people; one of somehow "substandard" language.  I've heard people say things like "talking in dialect"--no article--as if everyone wasn't always!  I don't know if this is a matter of education, or what, but it certainly complicates the issue.

Edit: I myself am partial to terms like topolect and sociolect, which are more precise anyway and have less baggage, but then there's the messy issue when the two overlap... that plus the fact that they're, well, jargon.

Edit 2: What about the terms for "dialect" and "language" in languages other than English?  Do your terms have similar baggage and muddling of meaning?


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

xjm said:


> I agree strongly with everything KeninPDX has said.
> 
> There are definitely distinct dialects in AE, differentiated not only by accent/phonetics but also by word choice and even grammar, especially in rural areas.  These dialects can be difficult for a standard speaker to understand.  There is also definitely stigmatization of less standard dialects.  The more rural it is, the more stigmatized it tends to be.
> 
> For a long time, I would adopt a Southern accent if I wanted to do an impression of an ignoramus.  I didn't even realize I was doing it, or how bigoted it was, until well into my college career.
> 
> It's probably the worst for AAVE speakers, because people's linguistic prejudices get tangled up with their racial prejudices.  I constantly hear whites, teenagers especially but adults as well, parroting and making fun of AAVE, even in a very "politically correct" city.
> 
> Primary and secondary schools only make it worse by constantly calling features of AAVE "bad English" or "bad grammar."  I can remember elementary school teachers actually making fun of black students' pronunciations in front of the whole class.  A student would say "Can I ask you something?" (with ask pronounced "aks") and the teacher would say, "Please don't axe me."  Or a teacher would repeat something the student said and exaggerate the accent.  Or mock the use of "ain't."   That sort of thing.  This wasn't 50 years ago or something; this was in the late 80s.
> 
> Edit: I'd also point out that the definition of "dialect" is a bit fuzzy and many people prefer to think of dialect continuums, with slight regional variations at one end and mutually unintelligible languages at the other.  If I had to guess, Europe has more entrenched variations and higher "dialect density" because of the longer history of specific linguistic/ethnic/cultural identities there.
> 
> I'd go so far to say that AAVE may be more distinct from the standard American dialect than, say, spoken Hindi and Urdu are from each other.   And those are politically/culturally classified as separate _languages_.  So a lot depends on cultural context.



I agree. To most people (at least in NYC), the southern and midwestern accents give the impression that you didn't go to school or that you're a farmer. You'd definitely get made fun of in schools here.
As for AAVE, I *hate* the way they talk. I believe it's not because of their education, but rather their environment. They grow up trying to be gangsters and they don't realize that they sound completely ridiculous when they speak. I'm not saying they all speak like that, because I know many black people that speak good English, but it is a big problem in the black community.


----------



## xjm

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> I agree. To most people (at least in NYC), the southern and midwestern accents give the impression that you didn't go to school or that you're a farmer. You'd definitely get made fun of in schools here.
> As for AAVE, I *hate* the way they talk. I believe it's not because of their education, but rather their environment. They grow up trying to be gangsters and they don't realize that they sound completely ridiculous when they speak. I'm not saying they all speak like that, because I know many black people that speak good English, but it is a big problem in the black community.



Unfortunately this is an example of exactly the stigma I mean (the impression that the use of AAVE is a "problem," "sounds ridiculous," and means people who use it "want to be gangsters").

Edit: To me, it makes no more sense than saying someone who grew up in England is stuck up because they speak BE.


----------



## Kevin Beach

As a Briton who speaks BrE with a traditional "received" accent (having been mocked at my South London school for using the residue of my parents' Cumbrian accent, but not wanting to adopt the London accent of my tormentors), I have to say that AAVE can sound musical, expressive and inventive.

But how sad that some Americans seem to be falling into the pattern of snobbery and inverted snobbery that we are trying to get rid of in Britain. To despise a person's accent is not because of the sound, but because of the associations with previous users that it has for you. That's not rational.

We should rejoice in each other's ways of speech, just as I have learned to enjoy the London accent I once hated because of its bad memories for me.


----------



## wildan1

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> the way they talk. I believe it's not because of their education, but rather their environment. They grow up trying to be gangsters and they don't realize that they sound completely ridiculous when they speak. I'm not saying they all speak like that, because I know many black people that speak good English, but it is a big problem in the black community.


 
It might be a big problem for you, VR, but not for those Black English speakers for whom it is a native language. Many Black English speakers are completely able to code-switch to standard AE and do so daily at work or elsewhere in broader society. People do this all over the world, as evidenced by posts above from many countries.

Most likely they don't really care what other people think about how they speak among themselves. Why should they?


----------



## Zarcero

This is an interesting thread. Here are some of my observations:

1. When I lived in Aschaffenburg, Germany the local dialect was used as much as the High German in the workplace. However, in social settings like bars, restaurants, parties with locals, etc., talk was almost exclusively in the local dialect. Lots of local dialects in Germany, hence the value of High German.

2. In the Texas Hill Country, what little German that is still spoken there has really gotten weird and bastardized. As an example, _*without*_ now translates to *mitaus*. No, I am not kidding. Go figure.

3. In the Acadian region of Louisiana (another place I spend a lot of time in), Cajun French has seen a resurrection of late. However, it is now being cleaned up with proper French, so one has to wonder if the Cajun French will lose its character and regionalism. The issue here being that Cajun French was almost wiped out, being that for a period of time it was actually illegal to speak it. There are now a few immersion schools in Lafayette, LA. However, much of the orginal dialect has been lost.

4. Ebonics. One has to be careful here. There is a definite slant to the English used by African-Americans and it is based on the rural South and migrations out of the South. However, that is not necessarily the Ebonics that you are hearing in the cities today. Much of the "gangsta" style talk that is heard in the cities is just play-acting talk. What used to be called J_ive, _which is different from Ebonics. Those who speak it usually clean it up when outside of their group, as indicated in one of the posts upthread.

5. I spend a lot of time in Africa, Nigeria which is Anglophone, and Angola which is Lusophone (I am in Angola right now). In Nigeria, I have noticed Jive and Ebonics creep into the local English, reaching across from the US. In Angola, though Lusophone, I have seen a lot of Spanish mixed in now due to the Cuban influence. In fact many of my clients here, being Cuban trained, are actually more comfortable speaking Spanish to me than Portuguese or English. _*Portuñol *_has developed, but I don't how long-term that will exist, since the wars are over and the Cubans are gone.


----------



## Eroi Del Mare

Hutschi said:


> when I was a very young child, I lived in a village, where they spoke a  German dialect. Later I moved to Dresden and my parents used the  standard language and they taught me the standard language. When I come  to the village, they switch to the standard (with some accent), when a  non-dialect speaker attends. They switch to dialect, when they speak to  each other.
> 
> Is this the normal behavior of dialect speakers, or does it depend on  the dialect? (They know that I understand the dialect. But I cannot  speak it properly anymore.)



As dialect speaker and lover,this is not (at least for me) the  normal behavior of dialect speakers,we use it also when the other  speaker is unable to understand it.A basic condition to use it ,it is  that the other speaker must have ,somehow ,a "link" with us (i don t  know, to be born here or to have father  which is born here,or if you  lived here etc etc).
Usually i have the tendency to defend it,for many reason,a reason, for  example, is:many peoples have been here during the History ,but there  are not physical signs of their presence.For example here there are been  the Normans,but the nearest sign of their presence is a castle  ,approximately, at 50 KM from where i live.But something of them  remained..... in the dialect .For example trubulu and trouble are the  same word (the local variation is trubbulu) here you can find an  interesting thread
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2103371


----------



## Hutschi

May be the problem is that the dialect is almost not comprehensible for standard language speakers. So they want to be polite and switch to their local variant of standard German coll. language to let you attend. Even if they know that I understand them, they do not feel it.
The dialect has such nice words as "Öwaschicharuhm" which no standard language speaker understands. In standard it is Kohlrabi as English kohlrabi.
Strange: English is much more similar here for this word.

There is an additional sound shift, another grammar, and there are lots of other words. Unfortunately, I cannot speak it active, but I understand it.

The dialect hat much influence to the regional coll. language, so some people think this is the dialect, but it isn't.

Is your dialect comprehensible to the non dialect speakers?


----------



## Eroi Del Mare

Hutschi said:


> There is an additional soun shift, another grammar, and there are lots  of other words. Unfortunately, I cannot speak it active, but I  understand it.


This is what i call the legacy of the past.




Hutschi said:


> Is your dialect comprehensible to the non dialect speakers?



Pratically ,in Italy ,i presume that all population has the  capacity to switch from italian to local dialect ,but obviously each uhm  ,we say, 200 km maybe 300 km (maybe something more or maybe something  less),the various dialects begin to become uncomprehensible each  other.Then for me it becomes very difficult to ,completly, understand a  dialect too far from "my house".


----------



## Hutschi

I am living in Saxony for more than 50 years, but cannot switch to the "Saxxony" dialect. Nevertheless, my accent switched a little bit with rests of my former dialect kept in intonation.
I speak almost standard German now with some rests of dialect and a few words of the local dialects, the most important of them is "Nu!"="Yes!" (I do not use "Nee!"="No!", however, but standard German "Nein!").


----------



## Eroi Del Mare

Hutschi said:


> I am living in Saxony for more than 50 years, but cannot switch to the "Saxxony" dialect. Nevertheless, my accent switched a little bit with rests of my former dialect kept in intonation.
> I speak almost standard German now with some rests of dialect and a few words of the local dialects, the most important of them is "Nu!"="Yes!" (I do not use "Nee!"="No!", however, but standard German "Nein!").



Usually in Germany people is unable to switch from national language to "local" dialect?
There is not an association ,an organization that "protect the dialect"?
Another nation where to switch from national language to "local" dialect is enough usual is Norway.There are trøndersk nordnorsk etc etc.

æ å two letters used to say = "me too".(it should be trøndersk)

Once i heard a norwegian guy to use "ekki" (not),on icelandic ekki means "not".Now we know that the Danish strongly influenced  the Norwegian,and we know that the Icelandic "originates"  from Old Norse. Probably something remained into the dialect?

Just the last thing ,i hope that you will appreciate it.On Brazil there is the *Hunsrückisch *( i read that it should be an high german dialect,i don t know  "how" the Portuguese influenced it) here you find articles with some examples  on wiki.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Riograndenser_Hunsr%C3%BCckisch
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Hunsrückisch


----------



## Alxmrphi

> Once i heard a norwegian guy to use "ekki" (not),on icelandic ekki means  "not".Now we know that the Danish strongly influenced  the  Norwegian,and we know that the Icelandic "originates"  from Old Norse.  Probably something remained into the dialect?


The words for no(t) in North Germanic languages are quite similar to one another:

Icelandic:* ekki*
Faroese: *ikki*
Norwegian:* ikke*
Danish: *ikke*
Swedish:* inte*

Are you sure that it just wasn't the Norwegian word for it?

Riguardando i dialetti in Italia, sono rimasto proprio sorpreso quando ho guardato Gomorrah, non ci ho capito un ca**o!
Anche una mia amica a Roma mi ha detto che doveva guardarlo con i sottotitoli, dato che e' cosi' incomprensibile fuori dalla portata di forse 70km da Napoli.


----------



## Eroi Del Mare

Not , he used ekki,in trøndersk itj, there is also an ikkje but i don t remember in which dialect.
Io l 'ho guardato senza sottotitoli e l 'ho capito parzialmente ma non completamente diciamo forse un 30%-40%.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Eroi Del Mare said:


> Not , he used ekki,in trøndersk itj, there is also an ikkje but i don t remember in which dialect.
> Io l 'ho guardato senza sottotitoli e l 'ho capito parzialmente ma non completamente diciamo forse un 30%-40%.



What area are you from?
I'm guessing it'd have to be fairly close, my friend in Terracina who speaks parts of the dialect said she didn't understand nearly a word of it. So I'd guess no more north than Terracina, and no more south than Salerno.

But that's only working under the assumption of dialect similarity, not including the possibility of having a parent from there who speaks the dialect etc. Maybe some people are just more wired to take sense and make connections than others though. I wouldn't say you could be in Sardinia or even in the Veneto region or Milan, and be able to understand even 20% of that film.


----------



## Hutschi

Eroi Del Mare said:


> Usually in Germany people is unable to switch from national language to "local" dialect?  ...https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/wiki/Hunsrückisch



Before you can switch, you must know it. I never learned the local dialect.
May be it was the area whre I lived, a ot of new flats and many people from other regions. So only some spoke local dialect. But the parents and school tried to forbid even this: "Spreche ordentlich, verschlucke die Endsilben nicht, ..." - "Speak correctly, don't swallow the end syllables" - and so on.

I did not recognize as child that it was dialect, I thought it were improper and false speaking ...


----------



## Alxmrphi

> I did not recognize as child that it was dialect, I thought it were improper and false speaking ...



Unfortunately that type of thinking is like a virus that appears to be endemic in our societies around the world. If only we could change it on a mass scale.


----------



## Eroi Del Mare

Alxmrphi said:


> What area are you from?
> I'm guessing it'd have to be fairly close, my friend in Terracina who speaks parts of the dialect said she didn't understand nearly a word of it. So I'd guess no more north than Terracina, and no more south than Salerno.
> 
> But that's only working under the assumption of dialect similarity, not including the possibility of having a parent from there who speaks the dialect etc. Maybe some people are just more wired to take sense and make connections than others though. I wouldn't say you could be in Sardinia or even in the Veneto region or Milan, and be able to understand even 20% of that film.



Uhm probably i understood something more ,simply because i always been interested into dialects.And yes..., probably my dialect helped me but not so much....



Hutschi,there is not an association ,an organization,a law that "protect the dialect"?


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

Hutschi said:


> Before you can switch, you must know it. I never learned the local dialect.
> May be it was the area whre I lived, a ot of new flats and many people from other regions. So only some spoke local dialect. But the parents and school tried to forbid even this: "*Spreche* ordentlich, verschlucke die Endsilben nicht, ..." - "Speak correctly, don't swallow the end syllables" - and so on.
> 
> I did not recognize as child that it was dialect, I thought it were improper and false speaking ...



Well, that one I don't call ordentlich nor proper Hochdeutsch...


----------



## Hutschi

This is influence of dialect.

Another relict is "Ich lerne dir ..." instead of "Ich lehre dich".
("I learn you" instead of "I teach you". I think, "I learn you something" was used in English, too, for "I teach you something", at least regionally.)



Eroi Del Mare said:


> ...
> Hutschi,there is not an association ,an organization,a law that "protect the dialect"?


No, there isn't, at least I do not know one.


----------



## Alxmrphi

> Another relict is "Ich lerne dir ..." instead of "Ich lehre dich".
> ("I learn you" instead of "I teach you".)



This used to be the way we said it in English, "_That'll learn ya_" etc.
Then the verb changed and lost the _teach_ meaning, but it's still said in a lot of northern local dialects in England today.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

Hutschi said:


> This is influence of dialect.



Don't think so... here in Lower Saxony the young generation also speaks so, and I don't see many Platt speakers around.


----------



## Hutschi

Why is it considered as wrong, then?
For me it was the natural way, much better than "Ich lehre dich". "Ich lehre dich" sounds very strange to me even if it is correct. I would say "Ich lehre dir" or "Ich lerne dir" with dative object. 
But Angelo is right. If something is widespread and used in many dialects, usually it is old.


----------



## Istriano

In Berlin, *I love you* is said _Ich liebe dir_, and not_ Ich liebe dich._ 
Which is similar to _Eu lhe amo _in my dialect of Portuguese (instead of _Eu a amo_).


----------



## Copperknickers

Dialects are used to show familiarity. I use Scottish dialect with Scottish people, and Southern English dialect with my parents who are English. Luckily I never have the problem of my accent being made fun of, seeing as I have the two most feared accents in the English language: Glaswegian and Cockney. (only worse one is Scouse )


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Copperknickers said:


> Dialects are used to show familiarity. I use Scottish dialect with Scottish people, and Southern English dialect with my parents who are English. Luckily I never have the problem of my accent being made fun of, seeing as I have the two most feared accents in the English language: Glaswegian and Cockney. (only worse one is Scouse )



Try mastering Dublin English and let's see how far you get.


----------



## Copperknickers

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Try mastering Dublin English and let's see how far you get.



As it happens my grandmother is from Dublin so I've got that nailed, to be sure .


----------



## stevea

Copperknickers said:


> Dialects are used to show familiarity. I use Scottish dialect with Scottish people, and Southern English dialect with my parents who are English. Luckily I never have the problem of my accent being made fun of, seeing as I have the two most feared accents in the English language: Glaswegian and Cockney. (only worse one is Scouse )



Interesting re the scouse accent - there are a lot of them depending on which part of the area you come from.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

stevea said:


> Interesting re the scouse accent - there are a lot of them depending on which part of the area you come from.



Indeed. Some bear a very clear resemblance to a working class Dublin accent, others far less so.


----------



## Kurtchen

Istriano said:


> In Berlin, *I love you* is said _Ich liebe dir_, and not_ Ich liebe dich._
> Which is similar to _Eu lhe amo _in my dialect of Portuguese (instead of _Eu a amo_).



or even _Ick liebe dir_ which is a boon for most foreign visitors (think JFK)


----------



## Frank78

Kurtchen said:


> or even _Ick liebe dir_ which is a boon for most foreign visitors (think JFK)



I'm really wondering if he pronounced it accidentially that way or intentionally. As far as I know he had a sheet of paper with a phonetic transcription on it so it should be "*eesh* bin eye-n bear-leener"


----------



## chifladoporlosidiomas

I speak two dialects of English (I don't think I speak GA): Californian and AAVE. I really don't speak the latter unless I'm in a really relaxed environment with others who speak AAVE. I actually don't even speak it at home that often; my siblings and I I think are the only ones who don't use it at home very thickly. My mom does and sometimes it's hard for us to understand her (one day she was talking about _tiles_ and all we heard was _towels_). I for the most part only speak Californian English, northern variant and I take a lot of pride in it. I guess I don't use AAVE 'cause I can't get away with it in writing and in school


----------

