# Appreciation of one's own way of speaking



## MarX

Hello!

This question came into my mind because today I read for the umpth time a Chilean saying "Los chilenos hablamos mal" (We Chileans speak badly).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to be something many Chileans agree about.

Are there other places where it is common to say "We speak badly"?
Which by the way doesn't necessarily mean that you stop speaking like that.
The Chileans continue speaking the way they themselves describe as "bad".

Salam,


MarX


----------



## ascension

I think it's fairly common for New Yorkers to refer to their accents as ugly. At the same time, there's a certain amount of pride that goes along with it. In other parts of the US most people will quickly recognize the New York accent, and I think it's fair to say that despite acknowledging that it is "ugly," most New Yorkers are quite proud of it and don't attempt to change it.

Note, though, that I'm talking about an accent and not about grammar.


----------



## anothersmith

What a strange thing to say!  I've never heard anyone say anything like that.  (And as a fan of Isabel Allende and Ariel Dorfman, I'm particularly surprised to hear that _Chileans_ are saying that.)


----------



## MarX

Thanks for the replies so far!



anothersmith said:


> What a strange thing to say!  I've never heard anyone say anything like that.  (And as a fan of Isabel Allende and Ariel Dorfman, I'm particularly surprised to hear that _Chileans_ are saying that.)


Trust me, I've heard "los chilenos hablamos mal" many times. That's why I posted this question.
In Jakarta, the spoken language is very different from the written language, yet we don't usually say we speak badly.


----------



## jinti

I've heard many Haitians here in New York City refer to the Haitian Creole they speak as "broken" or "bad" French, and some have gone so far as to tell me that they don't speak any language, only Creole.


----------



## MarX

jinti said:


> they don't speak any language, only Creole.


I've always thought Creole _is_ a language.
I guess I have to inform myself more.


----------



## Ayazid

Unfortunately, this stance seems to be very common in Arabic countries, especially among its muslim populations. I´ve been told various times by Arabic speaking people that their spoken dialects are just a bad and degenerated "street language", incomparable with Classical Arabic which is highly esteemed and praised as the language of Quran and therefore of the final revelation of God. Also almost all printed material is written in this language. In addition to its religious importance the Classical Arabic is also considered to be the greatest bond between people of various Arab countries.


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

In Andalusia, Spain, many Andalusians think that they speak a bad Spanish, not that they just speak with an accent and that their accent is as valid as any other accent.
Some Andalusians do not say clearly " I speak bad Spanish" or "my accent is awful" but when they are in formal situations , they try to switch to a more standard Central Spain accent, which means that they think their accent is not fit for certain high situations.
Some others are proud of their accent and have no problem speaking with their accent wherever they are.
I remember a woman telling me that her son spoke very well " he doesn't look like an Andalusian".


----------



## javier8907

PABLO DE SOTO said:


> I remember a woman telling me that her son spoke very well " he doesn't look like an Andalusian".


 
You mean "he doesn't *sound* Andalusian", I suppose. I thought non-Spanish speakers might get lost here.

Well, here in Northern Spain, the case is quite the opposite. I think we consider we have a pronunciation close to the standard -not that we're convinced people should speak like on TV-. use relatively good grammar and appropriate choice of words, but not as much (and nice) vocabulary, though, as one encounters in some areas in Latin America; this is most amazing when it happens in rural zones. So I'd say we speak rather well here -or that's the idea we've got, and that's this thread about- meaning the average speaker is somewhat more competent than in many other places. Anyway, if I were to choose the place where Spanish is best spoken, I would say it's inside a circle some 50 kms around Valladolid.

But there are people here in the Basque country, mostly as you get out of the urban areas, which find serious difficulties in expressing themselves correctly in Spanish; this is not usually perceived as a fault by young people. However, older people who were forced in their days to use a language which wasn't theirs and they did not master -namely Spanish- and learnt to regard their own -Basque- as despicable, probably have that feeling. Such cases are not so rare, but they go dying out.

Nowadays is much more usual to hear people complain about how badly they speak Basque language -to people that use it, of course- which doesn't mean they do real efforts to improve. The problem is, the standardized version of Basque is not perceived as good language by native speakers, so it would be difficult to find a model to learn from, even if those people who complain had the will to.


----------



## hfpardue

anothersmith said:


> What a strange thing to say! I've never heard anyone say anything like that. (And as a fan of Isabel Allende and Ariel Dorfman, I'm particularly surprised to hear that _Chileans_ are saying that.)


 
Come down to Chile and you will hear Chileans negatively describe their Spanish all the time. It is very common. That is not to say they actually speak badly. There are so many people and so many accents in this country that it is impossible to generalize. Who can really say which is the correct way to speak Spanish anyway? What is the correct way to speak English? I'm not going to let some Londoner tell me my English is bad. It's all a matter of opinion. Now if you blatantly ignore rules of grammar, that's another story, but many Chileans actually speak correctly, but their pronunciation is not complete. Whose pronunciation is complete?

Also, I wouldn't think of Isabel Allende's novels as the best example of Chilean Spanish.  Sure, she is a bigtime hotshot Chilean author who doesn't even live in Chile anymore, but if she is like most authors with deep pockets, her books are carefully edited so that the Spanish is impeccable.  The dialogue in her books is definitely representative though.


----------



## hfpardue

Ayazid said:


> Unfortunately, this stance seems to be very common in Arabic countries, especially among its muslim populations. I´ve been told various times by Arabic speaking people that their spoken dialects are just a bad and degenerated "street language", incomparable with Classical Arabic which is highly esteemed and praised as the language of Quran and therefore of the final revelation of God. Also almost all printed material is written in this language. In addition to its religious importance the Classical Arabic is also considered to be the greatest bond between people of various Arab countries.


 
Very nice explanation. Beautiful English by the way.


----------



## hfpardue

hfpardue said:


> CoSure, she is a bigtime hotshot Chilean author who doesn't even live in Chile anymore , but if she is like most authors with deep pockets, her books are carefully edited so that the Spanish is impeccable. The dialogue in her books is definitely representative though.


 
Just in case anyone was wondering, I think I may have made a mistake about Isabel Allende not living in Chile anymore. She may still have a residence here in addition to the U.S. As I was eating dinner last night, I stumbled upon an article in the paper which led me to question myself.  I'd hate to spread lies about her. Ok, chao


----------



## attitude

In every country there are people who speaks badly. For example, in Argentina many do not use accents or the right spelling.


----------



## la zarzamora

hfpardue said:


> Just in case anyone was wondering, I think I may have made a mistake about Isabel Allende not living in Chile anymore. She may still have a residence here in addition to the U.S. As I was eating dinner last night, I stumbled upon an article in the paper which led me to question myself. I'd hate to spread lies about her. Ok, chao


 

I think she has been living in the US for decades now.


----------



## la zarzamora

attitude said:


> In every country there are people who speaks badly. For example, in Argentina many do not use accents or the right spelling.


 

Could you provide some examples please?


----------



## hfpardue

attitude said:


> In every country there are people who speaks badly. For example, in Argentina many do not use accents or the right spelling.


 
In every country there are people who speak* badly.


----------



## PIKILIA

MarX said:


> Hello!
> 
> This question came into my mind because today I read for the umpth time a Chilean saying "Los chilenos hablamos mal" (We Chileans speak badly).
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to be something many Chileans agree about.
> 
> Are there other places where it is common to say "We speak badly"?
> Which by the way doesn't necessarily mean that you stop speaking like that.
> The Chileans continue speaking the way they themselves describe as "bad".
> 
> Salam,
> 
> 
> MarX



I just came back from spending two months in Chile visiting my boyfriend's relatives and traveling all over the country. I don't recall a single day without having people asking me how I was coping with their terrible accent and particular way of speaking spanish! I agree, some noticeable particularities here and there... But after a week, I didn't even noticed.

Interesting thread!


----------



## la zarzamora

I think the Chileans have a very sweet accent.


----------



## danielfranco

Well, that's a strange concept to me, as an erstwhile Mexico City Mexican and pseudo-Texan. I mean, in those two cultures we have no problem going around telling other people how badly they speak. But we are not big on the humble pie thingy of saying WE speak badly, although we certainly are not the best examples of either Spanish- or English-speakers, you know?

Interesting...
D


----------



## hfpardue

danielfranco said:


> Well, that's a strange concept to me, as an erstwhile Mexico City Mexican and pseudo-Texan. I mean, in those two cultures we have no problem going around telling other people how badly they speak. But we are not big on the humble pie thingy of saying WE speak badly, although we certainly are not the best examples of either Spanish- or English-speakers, you know?
> 
> Interesting...
> D


 
In the U.S. Mexican Spanish is all I hear in my city, so I am used to it. There is not a Chilean to be seen.

Here in Chile, a lot of my students (Chileans) tell me Mexicans sound weird and funny , which is a normal comment among people from different countries with the same language. When I arrived here in Chile the Spanish sounded fast and mumbly, but now it's not so bad. However, Mexican Spanish still might be easier for me to comprehend.  I know I am making big generalizations, but I have not been everywhere in Mexico and Chile to give a detailed account of the various accents and other aspects of pronunciation.


----------



## danielfranco

Right. Even other Mexicans say that people from Mexico City speak "weird": "as if they were singing", is the more common comment.
And, heck, neighbor, y'all know down here in Texas we ain't goan' aroun' tellin' folks they's talkin' worse'n others, mainly 'cuz they ain't understand what we sayin' most of the time, ya hear?

[Sorry, accent getting out of hand again]

Anyway, I know a couple of Chileans, so I'm going to ask them about this. I'll get back to you all eventually.

D


----------



## hfpardue

danielfranco said:


> Right. Even other Mexicans say that people from Mexico City speak "weird": "as if they were singing", is the more common comment.
> And, heck, neighbor, y'all know down here in Texas we ain't goan' aroun' tellin' folks they's talkin' worse'n others, mainly 'cuz they ain't understand what we sayin' most of the time, ya hear?
> 
> [Sorry, accent getting out of hand again]
> 
> Anyway, I know a couple of Chileans, so I'm going to ask them about this. I'll get back to you all eventually.
> 
> D


 
Hot dog! That's some American English if I ever saw some. Spoken like a true Southerner or maybe Texan. The "neighbor" part isn't quite that common in North Carolina. We might go for "dude,man,buddy,fellow". I am a big fan of "y'all" and "you all" though. Once these Chileans learn Southern US English they'll be set to dominate the world.  Let me know what the Chileans up in America say. That's right I said "America"--haha, just kidding.


----------



## MarX

la zarzamora said:


> I think the Chileans have a very sweet accent.


I love the Chilean accent, but their negative view upon themselves is kind of confusing. It's different if the comment came from certain individuals, but in Chile it seems to be something general.

Any other places where such thing exists?


----------



## rainbow84uk

You find this negative attitude in many regions of Britain too, but this is based on decades of being told that only the speech of the south-east of England was 'correct'. In my county, Lancashire, many people are still convinced that we speak 'wrong' and will try to modify their speech if they leave the area, even though there's usually no problem being understood. Things are changing now, so that a light Scottish or Welsh accent can be heard reading the BBC news, but you would still be unlikely to hear most regional accents in such a formal setting. This only convinces people who don't speak RP and/or Standard English that the way they speak is totally wrong.


----------



## la zarzamora

rainbow84uk said:


> You find this negative attitude in many regions of Britain too, but this is based on decades of being told that only the speech of the south-east of England was 'correct'. In my county, Lancashire, many people are still convinced that we speak 'wrong' and will try to modify their speech if they leave the area, even though there's usually no problem being understood. Things are changing now, so that a light Scottish or Welsh accent can be heard reading the BBC news, but you would still be unlikely to hear most regional accents in such a formal setting. This only convinces people who don't speak RP and/or Standard English that the way they speak is totally wrong.


 
What does RP stand for?
Is Standard English what they used to call Queen's English?

By the way, I find the "proper" English accent sort of monotonous and boring. My absolute favourite is the Irish accent. Loooove it.


----------



## mirx

la zarzamora said:


> What does RP stand for?
> Is Standard English what they used to call Queen's English?
> 
> By the way, I find the "proper" English accent sort of monotonous and boring. My absolute favourite is the Irish accent. Loooove it.


 
RP
Received Pronounciation or, as you said, Queen's English. A link to wiki here.

In my part of México we also say that eveyone else speaks badly compared to us.

In Ireland most counties will admit to speaking badly or mispronouncing but "not as bad as in county X or county Y". I mean, there is always a part of the country where people just cannot be understood.

I have also read comments of Chileans going on how bad they speak the language, there are some similar posta made my Portoricans.

Saludos!


----------



## attitude

la zarzamora said:


> Could you provide some examples please?



Yes, of course. In Argentina it is hardly ever seen accents in informal written language. For instance, "¿Como estas?" instead of "¿Cómo estás?"



hfpardue said:


> In every country there are people who speak* badly.



Thank you for your correction


----------



## mirx

attitude said:


> Yes, of course. In Argentina it is hardly ever seen accents in informal written language. For instance, "¿Como estas?" instead of "¿Cómo estás?"
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your correction


 
Attitude, your comments are very severe and people may feel offended. When making such statement be sure to have reliable sources that will back you up, like works of writers, or magazine publications.

Most people, in most countries will have terrible faults in informal language.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

mirx said:


> In Ireland most counties will admit to speaking badly or mispronouncing but "not as bad as in county X or county Y". I mean, there is always a part of the country where people just cannot be understood.



This is true, I think most people from Dublin would say that we speak the "best", but really it's all relative. People from X area would probably believe that their accent or dialect is the standard and the rest of us are wrong.


----------



## EmilyD

*Rhode Island*, is the smallest of the "United" States, (not the least populated), and we are *infamous* for the indigenous accent.  It is related to the more famous Boston (Massachusetts) and Bronx (New York City) accents.

I have lived here for over 20 years and am still learning colloquial expressions.  Many folks quickly identify me as "foreign"...

A "cabinet" is usually not a piece of furniture. A "New York System" is also something edible....

People express mixed feelings about the *'Vo Dilun' accent.*Pride and shame coexist.

All best wishes,

_Nomi_


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

Pedro y La Torre said:


> This is true, I think most people from Castile would say that we speak the "best", but really it's all relative. People from Castile would probably believe that their accent or dialect is the standard and the rest of us are wrong.


 
I agree with this statement ,but in Spain I'd replace Dublin with Castile.


----------



## la zarzamora

EmilyD said:


> *Rhode Island*, is the smallest of the "United" States, (not the least populated), and we are *infamous* for the indigenous accent. It is related to the more famous Boston (Massachusetts) and Bronx (New York City) accents.
> 
> I have lived here for over 20 years and am still learning colloquial expressions. Many folks quickly identify me as "foreign"...
> 
> A "cabinet" is usually not a piece of furniture. A "New York System" is also something edible....
> 
> People express mixed feelings about the *'Vo Dilun' accent.*Pride and shame coexist.
> 
> All best wishes,
> 
> _Nomi_


 
hi, 

I just do not understand what you mean when you relate the Rhode Island accent with the Boston (very neutral) AND Bronx (not neutral al all!)accents. 
Also, after 20 years they think you are foreign, where are you from that they still infer that from the way you talk?

Lastly, what does "vo dilun" mean?

thanks!


----------



## javier8907

PABLO DE SOTO said:


> Originally Posted by *Pedro y La Torre*
> 
> 
> This is true, I think most people from Castile would say that we speak the "best", but really it's all relative. People from Castile would probably believe that their accent or dialect is the standard and the rest of us are wrong
> 
> I agree with this statement ,but in Spain I'd replace Dublin with Castile.



Well, I'm not from Castile, and I'd say they speak better Spanish than we urban Basque people do -not everywhere in Castile, though, but in some areas.


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

javier8907 said:


> Well, I'm not from Castile, and I'd say they speak better Spanish than we urban Basque people do -not everywhere in Castile, though, but in some areas.


 

This is just what we are talking about, many people who think their accent is worse than others accent, so your opinion is representative of a very common opinion all over Spain.
Not only Chileans think their Spanish is bad, or at least not the best. Many Spaniards believe it as well.
I am just talking of accents, not grammar structures, vocabulary etc, but even in these last cases, many differences cannot be considered wrong, but regional.
If I say " Voy en ca la Mari" instead of " Voy a casa de Mari" , I do not think I am speaking a bad Spanish. My opinion is that I am using a regional variation, but most Spaniards, even Andalusians, would not think so.

I think my accent is different from the Castilian one, but never worse.


----------



## javier8907

Well, that was grammar. In Spanish, "ir en" cannot be used with the same meaning as "ir a" (go to), so either you're speaking bad Spanish, or you're speaking another thing -call it dialect if you like.

Anyway, I didn't mean we urban Basque people speak bad Spanish, I actually think we speak quite good language. Nonetheless, I consider in some places like Valladolid, Palencia or Soria, people speak better than we do.

Also, there are places where many people say the first word that comes to their mouths, and other places where most people have pretty clear which word fits which context, and this can be one thing to note when you're looking at how good is a language spoken in some place -even if those rules vary from place to place.


----------



## MarX

Pedro y La Torre said:


> People from X area would probably believe that their accent or dialect is the standard and the rest of us are wrong.


In Chile I don't think anybody believes that his/her accent is the standard.
Makes me wonder which accent they'd consider standard. That of Spain? But that's a topic for another thread.


----------



## jmx

MarX said:


> In Chile I don't think anybody believes that his/her accent is the standard. Makes me wonder which accent they'd consider standard. That of Spain? But that's a topic for another thread.


Probably there's something that Spanish speakers grasp easily about all this, but others don't. What have in common the "_good Spanish_" accents ? Valladolid, Mexico City, etc. have in common that their pronunciation is relatively close to the "_written language_", that is, to a "one by one pronunciation of every single letter". On the other hand, accents like Andalusian, Chilean, Caribbean, etc. are the less close to it. For me it is quite clear that that is the basic question for many people, especially for those with no linguistic studies.

Of course there are other factors, for example the Valladolid accent is not closer to an "_orthographic pronunciation_" than the one from Bilbao or Zaragoza, but according to the traditional discourse by Spanish nationalists, "Old Castile" would be the "_cradle_" of the Spanish Nation, and that makes its Spanish "_purer_". Anyway, I think that discourse is changing nowadays.

Oh, and I repeat for the zillionth time in the forums that there isn't any "Castilian accent". The dialects in southern Castile are close to the Andalusian ones, and the dialects in northern Castile are difficult to tell from those in the Basque Country, Ebro Valley, etc.


----------



## PABLO DE SOTO

I agree with you, JMartins, and I' d even go further. The key lies in the pronounciation or not of the final s. It seems that for many people the only Spanish right way to say "las casas" is pronouncing final s. If you say "lah casah" or "la casa"( with a long a) your Spanish is not good, let alone if you say "lah cazah".
Why don't we accept that our language admits different pronounciations?
Why do we comdemn Andalusians, Chileans or Venezuelans to speak a _wrong_ Spanish?
You say the old discourse is changing, yeah but so slooooowly that many Andalusians or Chileans say their Spanish is bad ,what amazes our friend Marx (the forero).
I guess Pablo Neruda or Juan Ramón Jiménez wrote and spoke a beautiful Spanish, much better than the one of many people from areas supposed to speak the _best Spanish_


----------



## SleepingLeopard

la zarzamora said:


> I just do not understand what you mean when you relate the Rhode Island accent with the Boston (very neutral) AND Bronx (not neutral al all!)accents.


 
I certainly don't consider a Boston accent "neutral". I think it's one of the most recognizable American accents, and find it very easy to realize that someone is from Boston after only a few sentences. (Although some parts of the city have a "stronger" accent than others).

As far as the recognizable American accents/dialects go (New England, the South, etc.), I find that people are very proud of them, but some still think that other people may think badly of them.

For example, I have a friend who is from Brooklyn, New York, which has a very recognizable dialect of American English. She is very proud of the way she talks, but while looking for jobs in New York City, she thought that her accent/dialect would reflect negatively on her. She learned to speak with a more "standard" accent (the way U.S. newscasters speak), and uses it while at work. Then, after work, she goes right back to her Brooklyn dialect.


----------



## jinti

la zarzamora said:


> ... Somebody from an upper class family will never have a very strong accent, will they? For example, I heard Sigourney Weaver-the actress- in different interviews and she sounds very neutral. Uma Thurman too. And Reese Whiterspoon -and she is from the South-.


There are many upper-class New Yorkers with strong accents, upper-class southerners with southern accents, etc. The fact that I'm from southeastern Pennsylvania has been immediately obvious to many people I've spoken to, although I don't think I grew up with a different accent from the rich kids in my town. I think perhaps actresses and others who make their livings by appealing through the media to a broad range of people aren't really good examples to judge accents by.


----------



## la zarzamora

jinti said:


> There are many upper-class New Yorkers with strong accents, upper-class southerners with southern accents, etc. The fact that I'm from southeastern Pennsylvania has been immediately obvious to many people I've spoken to, although I don't think I grew up with a different accent from the rich kids in my town. I think perhaps actresses and others who make their livings by appealing through the media to a broad range of people aren't really good examples to judge accents by.


 
Yes, what you say about actresses is probably right, I realized it after sending my post. Maybe the problem here is what is a strong accent to you and what is a strong accent to me. We agree 100 % about newscasters (it is obvious they have to speak neutrally so that everybody understand them and there is no hint of bias or something of the sort). I met many Americans while travelling the US and in London as well. So this is my experience: neutral accents: upper class Baltimore, upper class New York city(Manhattan), upper class Miami (any ethnic background), middle class California, middle and upper class Boston. Non neutral accents: middle class Mississipi, Georgia, Tenessee. These are the ones I remember.


----------



## MarX

jmartins said:


> Probably there's something that Spanish speakers grasp easily about all this, but others don't. What have in common the "_good Spanish_" accents ? Valladolid, Mexico City, etc. have in common that their pronunciation is relatively close to the "_written language_", that is, to a "one by one pronunciation of every single letter". On the other hand, accents like Andalusian, Chilean, Caribbean, etc. are the less close to it. For me it is quite clear that that is the basic question for many people, especially for those with no linguistic studies.


I never really thought about it, but you're right. 
The Colombian accent (I think most people mean by that Bogotá) is also close to the written language. They generally do not aspirate their S's.



PABLO DE SOTO said:


> I agree with you, JMartins, and I' d even go further. The key lies in the pronounciation or not of the final s. It seems that for many people the only Spanish right way to say "las casas" is pronouncing final s. If you say "lah casah" or "la casa"( with a long a) your Spanish is not good, let alone if you say "lah cazah".


----------



## Mate

*Moderator note:* 

I would like to remind you all the original question of this thread:  

_Are there other places where it is common to say "We speak badly"?_

Please keep the discussion focused on that question.


Thank you for your cooperation.


----------



## la zarzamora

Mateamargo said:


> *Moderator note:*
> 
> I would like to remind you all the original question of this thread:
> 
> _Are there other places where it is common to say "We speak badly"?_
> 
> Please keep the discussion focused on that question.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your cooperation.


 


Sorry, I suppose we got carried away.


----------



## hfpardue

Mateamargo, with respect to your English,



> _Off-topic and most probably offensive post_


 
"most probably" does not sound good in English. I know it is used, but I would avoid it if I were you. Instead go for "Off-topic and most likely an offensive post". Also, "I would like you all *to remember* the original question of this thread." sounds better than "I would like to remind you all the original question of this thread." 

In rural North Carolina some people say they speak badly. But more than anything I think they are referring to their accent. In most of the larger cities in NC people seem to speak the same. The difference is when you get out of the city and run into a small town. There the people will know right away that you are different because you might say things like "How *have* you been?" whereas they might say "How ya been?" which is actually much more fun to say .


----------



## Etcetera

I've never heard such a phrase in Russia. I must admit that I haven't been in most parts of the country, but I can't imagine a Petersburger or a Muscovite saying that their way of speaking is _bad_. 

We are aware of the fact that some words we use may (and do) sound strange, but we don't think it's bad.


----------



## Fleurs263

I find there to be a unpleasant snobbery attached to language - surely if someone is capable of expressing an idea which is understood, then what anyone thinks about the language used , is concerned more with prejudice - a person's background or standard of education?  I'm referring specifically to the English language, spoken in England.  There are people who have reached a good standard of English and then believe they can 'slang it up', even invent  or  deliberately misuse words; but if a less educated person were to do this, it would be  frowned upon ... note I say 'less educated' and not less intelligent.  There is for example a big difference between the language used by Eminem and Wordsworth, but are they not both poets, both using language ot describe, to expresss ...?


----------



## hfpardue

Fleurs263 said:


> I find there to be a unpleasant snobbery attached to language - surely if someone is capable of expressing an idea which is understood, then what anyone thinks about the language used , is concerned more with prejudice - a person's background or standard of education? I'm referring specifically to the English language, spoken in England. There are people who have reached a good standard of English and then believe they can 'slang it up', even invent or deliberately misuse words; but if a less educated person were to do this, it would be frowned upon ... note I say 'less educated' and not less intelligent. There is for example a big difference between the language used by Eminem and Wordsworth, but are they not both poets, both using language ot describe, to expresss ...?


 
I couldn't agree more with you. In the US the situation is similar, unfortunately. One thing worthy of mentioning I think is that often in American newspapers if someone in a high position makes a statement, his English will be quoted in flawless English, but if the person is poor or less than impressive to the press, his English will be quoted phonetically. For example,

Governor John: I just think we ought to do something about this problem. I'm going to ask people if they want to help.

Jim Bo: I just think we oughtta do somethin' about this problem. I'm gonna ask people if they wanna help.

The governor may very well speak just like Jim Bo, but that is rarely revealed in writing.


----------



## Mirlo

hfpardue said:


> I couldn't agree more with you. In the US the situation is similar, unfortunately. One thing worthy of mentioning I think is that often in American newspapers if someone in a high position makes a statement, his English will be quoted in flawless English, but if the person is poor or less than impressive to the press, his English will be quoted phonetically. For example,
> 
> Governor John: I just think we ought to do something about this problem. I'm going to ask people if they want to help.
> 
> Jim Bo: I just think we oughtta do somethin' about this problem. I'm gonna ask people if they wanna help.
> 
> The governor may very well speak just like Jim Bo, but that is rarely revealed in writing.


 
I agree I think there is a place in every country that does not speak in the correct way.


----------



## Adolfo Afogutu

MarX said:


> In Chile I don't think anybody believes that his/her accent is the standard.
> Makes me wonder which accent they'd consider standard. That of Spain? But that's a topic for another thread.



MarX:

Entiendo que el acento nunca puede ser bueno o malo. Si hablamos de pronunciación, eso es otro cantar. En español, a diferencia de otros idiomas, y dejando de lado el seseo,  el yeísmo y alguna que otra excepción suelta, no existen dos formas correctas de pronunciar una palabra. “Let's call the whole thing off” nunca habría podido ser escrita en español, al menos no con palabras bien pronunciadas. 

Los acentos pueden estar más lejos o más cerca de un estándar. Los acentos del español americano son completamente diferentes entre sí. El acento mexicano puede ser tan distinto del acento rioplatense como puede serlo del peninsular. No obstante, el español americano tiene un acento estándar y no es el acento español de Castilla. ¿De dónde es? De ningún lado. Podrás recorrer cada ciudad y cada pueblo donde se hable español en América y no vas a encontrar EL lugar donde se habla el acento español americano estándar.

El estándar viene de la industria del cine y de la televisión. Cuando se empezaron a hacer los doblajes, por una cuestión de costos, se hacían para toda la América de habla española. Eso perduró en el tiempo y se nos volvió costumbre. Si yo llego a escuchar un doblaje de una película o de una serial con acento mexicano, rioplatense o lo que sea, me siento incomodo inmediatamente. De la misma manera que no puedo ver una película doblada en España, no me gusta. El estándar evita todo regionalismo, “neutraliza” el acento. Así pues, el acento estándar del español americano viene de los doblajes de la industria cinematográfica. Siendo que la mayoría de las películas dobladas son “made in Hollywood”, podemos decir que el estándar nos vino de un país en el cual no se habla (no se hablaba) español. Irónico, ¿no es cierto? 

Cordial saludo.

A.A.


----------



## hfpardue

Adolfo Afogutu said:


> MarX:
> 
> Entiendo que el acento nunca puede ser bueno o malo. Si hablamos de pronunciación, eso es otro cantar. En español, a diferencia de otros idiomas, y dejando de lado el seseo, el yeísmo y alguna que otra excepción suelta, no existen dos formas correctas de pronunciar una palabra. “Let's call the whole thing off” nunca habría podido ser escrita en español, al menos no con palabras bien pronunciadas.
> 
> Los acentos pueden estar más lejos o más cerca de un estándar. Los acentos del español americano son completamente diferentes entre sí. El acento mexicano puede ser tan distinto del acento rioplatense como puede serlo del peninsular. No obstante, el español americano tiene un acento estándar y no es el acento español de Castilla. ¿De dónde es? De ningún lado. Podrás recorrer cada ciudad y cada pueblo donde se hable español en América y no vas a encontrar EL lugar donde se habla el acento español americano estándar.
> 
> El estándar viene de la industria del cine y de la televisión. Cuando se empezaron a hacer los doblajes, por una cuestión de costos, se hacían para toda la América de habla española. Eso perduró en el tiempo y se nos volvió costumbre. Si yo llego a escuchar un doblaje de una película o de una serial con acento mexicano, rioplatense o lo que sea, me siento incomodo inmediatamente. De la misma manera que no puedo ver una película doblada en España, no me gusta. El estándar evita todo regionalismo, “neutraliza” el acento. Así pues, el acento estándar del español americano viene de los doblajes de la industria cinematográfica. Siendo que la mayoría de las películas dobladas son “made in Hollywood”, podemos decir que el estándar nos vino de un país en el cual no se habla (no se hablaba) español. Irónico, ¿no es cierto?
> 
> Cordial saludo.
> 
> A.A.


 
En _Ortografía de la lengua española _publicado en el 1999 la RAE explica las varias formas de hablar el español y los varios acentos que existen en el mundo. Si pensamos que la RAE es la autoridad de la lengua, creo que sería posible saber en qué partes se habla mejor el idioma. Fíjate en que dije *mejor *ya que no puede haber un español perfecto si hay más de una forma correcta según la RAE. Sin embargo, el problema es que nadie toma en cuenta todas las reglas y habla así. Además, la Academia admite que hay varias pronunciaciones aceptables. Si queremos hablar de estándares en español, creo que es seguro decir que hay dos: un español estándar de América (que nadie realmente habla, pero que se entiende en toda América) y un español estándar de España que se oye en TVE y otros canales de España.

Echa un vistazo a esta frase para entenderme bien.

_¿Qué te pareció ver?_ What is it you think you saw?
Esta frase en América, por lo menos en Chile, que yo sepa, suena bien. No tiene nada de malo.

Por otro lado, creo que nadie en España diría _¿Qué te pareció ver?_ y si lo dijera, esa persona sonaría rara. Ustedes españoles optarían por "¿Qué es lo que pensaste que viste?" o algo por el estilo. Corríjanme si me equivoco, que es muy posible.


----------



## javier8907

Pues yo sí que diría "¿Qué (es lo que) te pareció ver?" Pero sólo para el pasado; para este caso que dices, sería "¿Qué (es lo que) te ha parecido ver?", "¿Qué (es lo que) has creído ver?", "¿Qué es lo que) crees haber visto?", "¿Qué (es lo que) crees/piensas que has visto?", "¿Qué (es lo que) te ha parecido que has visto?", pero nunca, ni siquiera hablando del pasado, "¿Qué es lo pensaste que viste?". En todo caso, "¿Qué es lo que pensaste que habías visto?", o "¿Qué es lo que pensabas que habías visto?" o algo por el estilo. En las zonas que hablan sólo con el pasado (Galicia, Asturias...) creo que tampoco lo dirían; en todo caso "¿Qué es lo que piensas que viste?".

Lo que sí sonaría raro es "¿Qué es lo que pensaste que viste?", además de, por lo menos a mí, feísimo.

En cuanto a los dos estándares a ambos lados del Atlántico, es cuando menos curioso, ya que aquí nos parece completamente normal oír a un rapero negrazo hablando castellano con perfecta dicción; sin embargo si veo a Nicolas Cage hablando en hispano, yo por lo menos tengo que quitar la película; me chirría. Sin embargo, cosas de la vida, puedo ver una argentina en versión original y aunque no entienda cosas, no ocurre eso.

De todas formas, hay cosas como el Oso Yogui que están dobladas en ¿mexicano? (además de con un tono un tanto peculiar), y que se haría rarísimo oírlas en español de España. Será el tener el oído hecho.

En cuanto al estándar de español de España, ese que se usa en televisión y en radio, creo que es el mismo que habla en Madrid la gente 'bien' (aunque en la radio los locutores suelen permitirse más licencias).


----------



## Adolfo Afogutu

hfpardue said:


> En _Ortografía de la lengua española _publicado en el 1999 la RAE explica las varias formas de hablar el español y los varios acentos que existen en el mundo. Si pensamos que la RAE es la autoridad de la lengua, creo que sería posible saber en qué partes se habla mejor el idioma. Fíjate en que dije *mejor *ya que no puede haber un español perfecto si hay más de una forma correcta según la RAE. Sin embargo, el problema es que nadie toma en cuenta todas las reglas y habla así. Además, la Academia admite que hay varias pronunciaciones aceptables. Si queremos hablar de estándares en español, creo que es seguro decir que hay dos: un español estándar de América (que nadie realmente habla, pero que se entiende en toda América) y un español estándar de España que se oye en TVE y otros canales de España.
> 
> Echa un vistazo a esta frase para entenderme bien.
> 
> _¿Qué te pareció ver?_ What is it you think you saw?
> Esta frase en América, por lo menos en Chile, que yo sepa, suena bien. No tiene nada de malo.
> 
> Por otro lado, creo que nadie en España diría _¿Qué te pareció ver?_ y si lo dijera, esa persona sonaría rara. Ustedes españoles optarían por "¿Qué es lo que pensaste que viste?" o algo por el estilo. Corríjanme si me equivoco, que es muy posible.



Hola Hppardue:

Completamente de acuerdo en que hay dos estándares, el europeo y el americano. En cuanto a lo de acento mejor o peor, tengo mis dudas. Pienso que es mejor hablar de cercano o lejano al estándar. Entiendo que el tema del acento no está relacionado con los errores: si se pronuncia: “amol” en vez de “amor”,  “pol qué” por “por qué”, “cansao” por “cansado”, “vamo” por “vamos”, no son temas de acento. Aclaro que no es una crítica, de hecho a mí me gusta mucho la diversidad, incluso en la pronunciación, ojalá nunca desaparezcan las diferencias. El español tiene a su favor la facilidad de que, aunque nunca hayas escuchado o leído una palabra, aunque no tengas idea de su significado, podrás pronunciarla correctamente sin margen de error. No es así en inglés, ya que, si nunca escuchaste una palabra, puedes llegar a tener dudas al pronunciarla. Pronunciar por primera vez una palabra en francés o en portugués también es más difícil que en español.

En cuanto a Chile, viví allí algunos años, lo recorrí desde Antofagasta hasta Punta Arenas. Hermoso, seguro y muy recomendable. En idioma: ni mejor ni peor que nadie. A la gente de pequeñas localidades, con poca educación formal, es muy difícil entenderle; a las personas que tienen educación formal, les entiendes sin problema. Exactamente lo mismo que en cualquier otro país.

Exactamente lo mismo pasa en cualquier idioma. Una vez, en Edimburgo,  me encontré en una cabina para fumar rodeado de algunas personas que limpiaban las oficinas donde yo trabajaba cada tres meses. No eran inmigrantes, eran escoceses. ¿Sabes lo que pensé? Que si con los ojos vendados, me hubieran bajado allí desde un helicóptero y me hubiesen preguntado: ¿en qué país estás? o ¿en qué idioma habla esta gente?, no habría sabido que responder… 

Cordial saludo

A.A.


----------



## javier8907

Yo no sé qué pensar de éste asunto, pero sí que me gusta ser coherente. Si no es correcto decir "amol", "pol qué" ni "calne", tampoco lo es decir "masmorra" ni "mesedora" ni, puestos a ser radicales, pronunciar "llave" como Yahve, como hacemos el 95% por lo menos de los hispanohablantes (sí, ya sé que lleva acento, pero quería respetar el mandamiento ese de no escribir el nombre de Dios en vano).

Hombre, lo de los escoceses es normal, hay que tener en cuenta que hablan medio en Scots, que no ha sido suavizado por clases educadas a lo largo de siglos ni ha tenido la gran influencia del francés (sobre todo en léxico) en toda la edad moderna que ha tenido el inglés estándar.


----------



## mirx

javier8907 said:


> Yo no sé qué pensar de éste asunto, pero sí que me gusta ser coherente. Si no es correcto decir "amol", "pol qué" ni "calne", tampoco lo es decir "masmorra" ni "mesedora" ni, puestos a ser radicales, pronunciar "llave" como Yahve, como hacemos el 95% por lo menos de los hispanohablantes (sí, ya sé que lleva acento, pero quería respetar el mandamiento ese de no escribir el nombre de Dios en vano).
> .


 
Aquí hay que considerar qué parte de la población boricua habla así.

El asunto "s, c, z, " es consirado correcto porque así hablan las personas cultas de América, y esto es en lo que se basa la Academia. 

No estoy seguro, pero no creo que en Puerto Rico o Cuba los comentarias de televisión se explesen así.


----------



## javier8907

¡Acabáramos, ahora la televisión es el modelo de lenguaje!

Se te han olvidado los dominicanos, que también existen.

La cuestión es al contrario. Las personas cultas en estos países hacen el esfuerzo de no decir "calne" (como en la mitad sur de España de no decir "vamo") porque no se considera correcto. Seguramente hace un siglo o dos en América gente culta no sesearía, y sería un deje popular, pero al cabo de los años se ha ido extendiendo tanto ese uso que sería tan pedantesco que un americano se empeñara en pronunciar todas las ces y las zetas como que un español pronunciara las uves. Lo digo porque algunos cubanos muy educados de vez en cuando meten alguna zeta. La pregunta es, si lo uno es aceptable, ¿por qué no lo otro, habida cuenta de que son usos extendidísimos en sus respectivas regiones? (hablo por lo de "vamo", lo de "amol" no lo sé porque no conozco a muchos caribeños para hacer la estadística; una dominicana que conocí lo decía).


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

A final reminder:



Mateamargo said:


> *Moderator note:*
> 
> I would like to remind you all the original question of this thread:
> 
> _Are there other places where it is common to say "We speak badly"?_
> 
> Please keep the discussion focused on that question.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your cooperation.



Thank you to those who have maintained the focus.


----------



## Adolfo Afogutu

javier8907 said:


> ¡Acabáramos, ahora la televisión es el modelo de lenguaje!
> 
> Se te han olvidado los dominicanos, que también existen.
> 
> La cuestión es al contrario. Las personas cultas en estos países hacen el esfuerzo de no decir "calne" (como en la mitad sur de España de no decir "vamo") porque no se considera correcto. Seguramente hace un siglo o dos en América gente culta no sesearía, y sería un deje popular, pero al cabo de los años se ha ido extendiendo tanto ese uso que sería tan pedantesco que un americano se empeñara en pronunciar todas las ces y las zetas como que un español pronunciara las uves. Lo digo porque algunos cubanos muy educados de vez en cuando meten alguna zeta. La pregunta es, si lo uno es aceptable, ¿por qué no lo otro, habida cuenta de que son usos extendidísimos en sus respectivas regiones? (hablo por lo de "vamo", lo de "amol" no lo sé porque no conozco a muchos caribeños para hacer la estadística; una dominicana que conocí lo decía).



Hola:

En cuanto a por qué se impuso el seseo en América, creo que la razón es que, en un principio, vinieron muchísimos andaluces, canarios y extremeños y no tantos castellanos. En el caso de Montevideo, todas las familias que primero la habitaron eran de las Canarias. En la segunda mitad del siglo XIX y en la primera mitad del XX, llegaron a América unos dos millones de gallegos, pero el seseo ya estaba impuesto hace rato. Se suma a eso que los gallegos que vinieron fueron, en su enorme mayoría, gente de escasísimos recursos, con lo cual, en su primera generación, no eran parte de la gente más instruida de los países receptores, por tanto su pronunciación de la ce y de la zeta no era un ejemplo a imitar. 

Yendo a por qué se considera o no un defecto el seseo, creo que la clave está en lo que mencionas acerca del habla de las personas cultas de cada país. En América, sesea el que no tiene educación formal, pero también lo hace Vargas Llosa o cualquier persona culta.  La comparación se hace con respecto a la manera de pronunciar que tienen las personas cultas de cada país o región y no con respecto a como pronuncian las personas cultas del centro y norte de España. No es tampoco una cuestión de democracia ni de mayorías: en mi país, es extendidísimo comerse la ese al final de la palabras, como en “vamo”, pero eso nunca será aceptado ya que los que hablan bien, no lo hacen ni lo van a hacer. 

Cordial saludo

A.A.


----------



## javier8907

Adolfo Afogutu said:


> No es tampoco una cuestión de democracia ni de mayorías: en mi país, es extendidísimo comerse la ese al final de la palabras, como en “vamo”, pero eso nunca será aceptado ya que los que hablan bien, no lo hacen ni lo van a hacer.




Lo mismo diría Cicerón.


----------



## Mate

*Moderator note*:

Regrettably, this thread has gradually transformed itself into a collection of posts containing little more than chat and personal opinions, most of them now deleted.

 Should anyone have some cultural insight that directly addresses the thread topic as stated in the first post, please contact the CD moderators.


Thread closed.


----------

