hThe English/Scottish/Irish accent and its demise in America

[slipthejab]

I was flipping channels today and they were playing Mel Gibson's Patriot for the umpteenth time this week. Groan. Yes I know Mel Gibson has questionable historical accuracy (I guess it comes with part and parcel with transparent plots and weak character development and formulaic story lines).

But anyhow... it got me to thinking... one device that's often used in films about the Revolutionary war and the entire colonial time period is they have the salt-of-the-earth colonists fighting the aristocratic and poncey Redcoats. :D It's a classic device because by adding the right sort of British accent you can make the Brits out to be absolute bastards on the basis of accent alone. :p Generally played by someone wearing a white wig with a weak chin and big honkin' nose. (hey Prince Charles is shoe in!) :p

But... wait a minute... the colonists hadn't been in North America all that long at that point... surely with some slight differences in class accent the vast majority would have also had British accents... not the flat American accent that Mel Gibson drones on in (actually as an Aussie he's got a bit of twang in there). Essentially many of your rank and file British Redcoats would have had the same accent as your average colonist/rebel no? :confused:

So just how long did it take for the colonists to lose their British accents? I realize that the accent morphed and adapted to different influences over time... but I'm curious if there is a rough time frame in which the accent became decidely non-British? :confused:

[koyo]

How dare you insult prince Charles. :D Didn't you know he was set to fight Mike Tyson???

He was the only guy with EARS big enough to go the distance.(chomp chomp!)

My son Cameron has lived in San fransisco for the last ten years and still retains his Scottish (braveheart, Gibson again) accent.

Awe ra best

koyo

[jwt]

Hi Slip,

From what I can remember of these things from studying English as part of my first degree, I think it is as much a case of the English accent moving away from the accent used by the settlers as the settlers becoming influenced by non-english speakers. In the 17th century there were a great deal of vowel shifts in spoken English which the accents of the settlers would have not necessarily undergone.

I suspect that then as now there would have been not only regional accents in different American colonies but also class related variations in these according to how closely the 'moneyed class' identified with the Enlish aristocracy and attempted to imitate them.

I would have thought that by the time of the war of independance there would have been probably even greater variance than there is now (in the American East at least) between the accents of the English redcoats and the accents of the majority of the men who fought against them whereas the accents of the 'leaders' of both sides would have been close. In some respects you can draw a parallel between the universiality of the English spoken by diplomats versus the rural/regional accents of American and English speakers today.

[pauli]

^^

like the man says, it's my understanding that the british accent has shifted over the past few hundred years; from what i've read, at the end of the 18th century the british sounded more or less like new englanders do now, so i can't really blame them for changing things.

[wrydolphin]

I vaguely remember a drama teacher going on about how the American accent from the Appelacians is closer to Shakespearian English then the current English accent.

But couldn't confirm that. I do know that a grammar shift occured well after colonization and Independance that actually means that the horrible grammar of the same area is original to spoken English rather then what we consider good grammar now.

[ember]

One resource on the subject: "A Host of Tongues: Language Communities in the United States", by Nancy Faires Conklin and Margaret A. Lourie. The one I have is copyright 1983 by The Free Press (so I expect there should be more up-to-date information available somewhere, but for a used book it was a good read).

Some summary from the book:

It does say something similar to the above, that the American language is more conservative than British, we still use some words and pronunciations that the U.K. has moved away from (colonial lag).

There's evidence of regional differences, but usually you'd get several U.K. accents blending to something new (dialect levelling).

But the wealthy Americans were able to keep up a little better with the shifts in U.K. English usage, particularly in Boston and for Southern plantation owners. So there's also a class feature to how the dialects spread...

[slipthejab]

Fascinating stuff there. I'll be looking up that book this week. Thanks for the tip off. :D

[Slindsay]

If you want to spoil practically any American made film which even touches on politics, sit down with a group of your friends, wait till your about 30 minutes into the film, pick the guy with the most British sounding accent of the bunch and from then on whenever he appears on screen make sure you insist on telling everyone in the room he's the baddy repeatedly.

I've lost count of the number of films I've spoiled for myself simply by ignoring all evidence and reason and insisting the guy with the English accent is the baddy until the dramatic plot twist proves me right. It really is depressingly easy to spot.

[slipthejab]

ROTFLMAO!!!

yeah I think chances are you'd run out of mates willing to watch films with you. Because sadly you're correct. :D

[ember]

Actually, we were just talking about that this weekend too. The villain du jour changes - for a time it was the guy with the German accent, then Russian, lately it tends to be the one(s) portrayed as Middle-Eastern.

[Hiroji]

How come most American flicks always have some poncy Londoner as the English guy?

Sean Bean, narr wer talkin' - some proper Yorkshire grit accent.

Yorkshire men have never been posh, don’t class the toffs as the only English, the real English are the ones at the recieving end of the whip.

[SnorriSturluson]

If you want to spoil practically any American made film which even touches on politics, sit down with a group of your friends, wait till your about 30 minutes into the film, pick the guy with the most British sounding accent of the bunch and from then on whenever he appears on screen make sure you insist on telling everyone in the room he's the baddy repeatedly.

I've lost count of the number of films I've spoiled for myself simply by ignoring all evidence and reason and insisting the guy with the English accent is the baddy until the dramatic plot twist proves me right. It really is depressingly easy to spot.

No, you're confusing movies with real life. :) In US films, it's usually the guy with the middle eastern accent, hooked nose, and five o clock shadow who's the villain.

For historical accents in the US, we've been eliding English/Scots/Scotch- Irish accents as "British" accents. Judging from the way these groups sound today, these are three substantially different accents. Around the time of the American revolution, the two largest white ethnic groups in what is now the east coast of the US were Scotch-Irish and Germans, and I would bet that these were the dominant influences on everyday speech. However, there were probably very large regional and class differences as well.

[Sifu Ben]

Of course, the other thing is that the bulk of the "British" troops were colonials (British regulars were involved in the minority of actions during the wars of independence). Just like how more Scots fought against Bonnie Prince Charlie than with him.

[Mitch]

Of course, the other thing is that the bulk of the "British" troops were colonials (British regulars were involved in the minority of actions during the wars of independence). Just like how more Scots fought against Bonnie Prince Charlie than with him.
We're here to take your FREEDOM!!!

Mitch :D

[TheMadhoose]

It's a classic device because by adding the right sort of British accent you can make the Brits out to be absolute bastards on the basis of accent alone.

come lets be fair they do bring it on themselves accents are merely coincidence
besides as a scotman i feel obliged to say it was the english at fault my countrymen were but pawns in a sordid game

and come on its a freckin movie who realy gives a monkeys

[slipthejab]

and come on its a freckin movie who realy gives a monkeys

If you're not interested in it... then no need to post. There are plenty here that took an interest in the concept being discussed. ;)

[Shadow_of_Evil]

you can make the Brits out to be absolute bastards on the basis of accent alone.

But they are bastards ;)
Well, not all Brits...just the English*

Anyhoo, interesting discussion. It actually reminds me of another thing. Why do so many Americans claim to be Irish? The Departed (recent version) brought this up in my mind. Matt Damon's character (aswell as some others) are constantly referring to themselves as being Irish...despite the fact they've never been to Ireland and their parents probably weren't even born in Ireland.
Is this typical of lots of Bostoners?

If you're not born in Ireland then you are not Irish, right? I mean, if both your folks are Irish than maybe you can kind of claim it, but other than that...no.





* It's a joke guys, chill.

[pauli]

Anyhoo, interesting discussion. It actually reminds me of another thing. Why do so many Americans claim to be Irish? The Departed (recent version) brought this up in my mind. Matt Damon's character (aswell as some others) are constantly referring to themselves as being Irish...despite the fact they've never been to Ireland and their parents probably weren't even born in Ireland.
Is this typical of lots of Bostoners?

If you're not born in Ireland then you are not Irish, right? I mean, if both your folks are Irish than maybe you can kind of claim it, but other than that...no.they're claiming irish ethnicity, not irish nationality.

otoh, they're also usually conflating irish identity with irish-american identity, which is the root of what you're getting at.

[wrydolphin]

Because the Irish were a large and very visable componant of immigrants in the late 1800's.

After all, the Irish seem to be Ireland's greatest export. ;)

[Sgt_Major]

Well, Im looking into moving stateside ..... and my accent is going with me :D

[wrydolphin]

Conformist.


Where are you looking at?

[Moosey]

I've only been to Ireland once (to Galway) but I couldn't help but notice that Irish women (ones from Galway anyway) are unusually fine! Is this the general trend in Ireland or was it just a touch of "girls are always hot when you're on holiday" syndrome?

[Sifu Ben]

After a steady diet of Murphy's and Jamieson's all women look hot ;)

[Sgt_Major]

90% of Irish girls are hot. The other 10% are extrememly ugly but we send them to convents :D

I'm looking at Atlanta area Wry - I can get a work transfer there no problem.

[Hiroji]

I've only been to Ireland once (to Galway) but I couldn't help but notice that Irish women (ones from Galway anyway) are unusually fine! Is this the general trend in Ireland or was it just a touch of "girls are always hot when you're on holiday" syndrome?

I can back you up there Doc!

I lived there for 6 months, Irish girls in my humble opinion are the best.

When i was in the Rep of Ire i found the people on a whole to be the nicest ive ever met.

[Buckeye Blue]

Of course, the other thing is that the bulk of the "British" troops were colonials (British regulars were involved in the minority of actions during the wars of independence). Just like how more Scots fought against Bonnie Prince Charlie than with him.

I don't think that is correct. There was a significant "loyalist" presence in the colonies, and they formed several fighting units. But the bulk of the fighting was carried out by British regulars with a significant amount of Hessian mercenaries. What is interesting is that the total amount of troops fighting in the Americas was puny by European standards (for instance Wellington had almost 70,000 men crammed into a three mile battlefield at Waterloo, whereas British General Howe had just over 30,000 men for his campaign through the colonies of New York and New Jersey).

The book 1776 is an excellent, and fast, read on the subject. I can't remember if the author won the Pulitzer Prize for this, or another of his works work.

[Shadow_of_Evil]

Because the Irish were a large and very visable componant of immigrants in the late 1800's

Yeah but being of Irish herritage dosn't make you Irish.

90% of Irish girls are hot. The other 10% are extrememly ugly but we send them to convents

Yeah I'd agree with that.
I remember some hot Cork girls. :)

[wrydolphin]

No- it makes you Irish-American depending on how ingrained the culture is. Some, like myself, have very little Irish culture left, though my Gran's German culture and my mother's New Orleans French culture are more ingrained in our family.

American culture is an odd mishmash of many different componants due to the nature of the immigration here.