Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ    Attic   

YAEDT? Syntax in dialects of English (was: Of accents & dialects (was: Azurian phonology)

From:Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
Date:Friday, October 24, 2008, 20:14
Doesn't Wells' _Accents_of_English_ cover dialectical variation as well?

On 10/24/08, Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 08:50:26 +0100, R A Brown > <ray@...> wrote: >>Michael Poxon wrote: >>>You don't have to go outside England for weird dialects, by the way! >>>Yes, there certainly are huge differences in both vocab and syntax just >>>within England. >> >>Quite so. Eldin is unlikely to have heard them from over the other side >>of the Pond. You have be there among the dialect speakers. >>[snip] >>>> But as for English dialects (that is, dialects of the English >>>> language, spoken >>>> within parts of the nation of England), are there really big >>>> differences in >>>> syntax between one and another? If so I've never heard of them. >> >>Syntax, morphology & lexis, as well as phonology. As I said above, it's >>not likely you would hear them across the Pond. >> >>-- >>Ray > > Can anyone tell us what some of these major differences in syntax are, and > which dialects have them, and where they're spoken? > > Especially those spoken within the kingdom of England itself. > > And, why those differences in syntax count as "major"? > > And, if there are any dialects of English spoken in England, that have > several > such major differences in syntax, what dialects and what differences are > involved? > > And BTW: When you speak of major differences in morphology; are there any > dialects of English spoken in England, in which there are any morphological > categories that don't exist in Standard English? > And if there are some that omit morphological categories that exist in > Standard English, which dialects omit them, and which categories are > omitted, > and what do dialect-speakers say instead? > > Thanks. > >> >>In these days of universal education and mass communication, most people >>in such places are 'bilingual', i.e. they speak dialect among those >>around them, but in situations when a wide audience is aimed at then >>they'll speak more or less standard English with some regional coloring >>in pronunciation. >> >>In my last job before I retired one of my colleagues came from the >>Toxteth area of Liverpool. He spoke standard English with a marked >>regional accent - he referred to it as "poshed up Scouse" - i.e. the >>phonology was partially modified to smooth out, so to speak, the more >>extreme differences between Scouse & RP (and the syntax and vocab were, >>of course, standard). But his wife told me that when he's with his >>brother then he's actually speaking Scouse and is almost >>incomprehensible to us southerners. >> > > I have noticed among nearly all of my acquaintances that their speech > conforms more closely to whatever 'lect they happen to share with their > interlocutors whenever they have a common 'lect, and to Standard Average > American English whenever they don't have a common 'lect. > > My own speech, when speaking to another Texan, is markedly more Texan, > than when speaking to other Michiganders. > > For children, or people who haven't "been around" much, differences in > dialect > between, say, Tennessee and New York, can be "mutually unintelligible". For > most random pairs of adult USAans or Canadians, though, it's possible for > any > two of them to make themselves comprehensible to each other. >
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>