How English would look if each accent had its own orthography

There are a huge range of English accents. It can take a while to adjust to another accent, but our brains do it relatively quickly. If we all wrote in IPA though, things would be a lot harder. We would have to sound it out and that might still not help us understand it.

Our orthography unites us. Everyone who speaks English can read what I am writing now, and understand it, no matter what accent they have. But I was intrigued to see what it would look like if each of our accents had a different orthography. Would that make it harder to understand each other’s writing?

I have been learning Swedish for a while and I quickly learned how similar it is to Norwegian and Danish. But each language has its own orthography, so it makes the languages look more different than they are. English speakers united orthography definitely helps us understand each other.

So what would English look like if each accent had its own regular orthography? I present to you, what English would look like if that were the case.

General American

IPA: /aɪ ləv leɪŋwɨdʒɨz. aɪ laɪk̚ tʰʉ ɹaɪt̚ ɨbaʊt̚ wɹ̩dz. soʊʃɫ̩ midiə ɪz ə gɹeɪt̚ pʰleɪs tʰʉ tʰɑɫk̚ tʰʉ pʰipɫ̩ hʉ ʃeɪɹ jɔɹ pʰæʃn̩./

Aë lîv leëngwiijiiz. Aë laëk tu raët iibaut wrdz. Souśl midiî ëz î greët pleës tò tølk tò pipl hò śeër ĭor pêśn.

Australian
IPA: /aɪ lʌv læŋgwɪdʒəz. aɪ laɪk tə raɪɾ əbaʊʔ wɜdz. soʊʃəL midiə ɪz ə greɪʔ pleɪs tə tɔk tə pipəl hu ʃɛə jə pæʃən/

Æ laf” leñk”wùđès”. Æ læk tè ræd èp”å’ wìt”ş. Sōcèl mēt”ēè ùs” è k”rā’ plās tè tōk tè pēpèl hū cìè yè pecèn

RP
IPA: /aɪ lʌv ˈlæŋgwəʤɪz. aɪ laɪk tuː raɪt əbaʊw wɜːdz. səʊʃəl mɛdɪjə ɪz ə greɪt pleɪs tə tɔːk tə piːpl huːw ʃeə jɔː pæʃən/

Aĭ làf¯ laingvüj¯ĭs¯. Aĭ laĭk tuu raĭt üp¯aùu wœt¯s¯. Süùçül mœt¯ĭjü ĭs¯ ü k¯reĭt pleĭs tü tok tü pīpl huu çeü jo paiçün

Northeast London
IPA: /ɑe lɐv ʹlæ:ŋgwɪʤɪz | ɑ lɑɪʔ tˢə ʋɑɪʔ bæʊʔ wɛ:dz | ʹsəʉʃɤ ʹmi:dɪə ɪz ə græɪʔ plæɪs tˢə tˢo:ʔ tˢə ʹpʰi:pəl ʊ ʃɛə jə ʹpæʃən/

A lav längwïjïz. A lai^ te vhai^ bäu^ wëdz. Seushü mèdïe ïz e gräi^ pläis te to^ te pipel u shëe je päshen.

All of them together
Aë lîv leëngwiijiiz. Aë laëk tu raët iibaut wrdz. Souśl midiî ëz î greët pleës tò tølk tò pipl hò śeër ĭor pêśn.
Æ laf” leñk”wùđès”. Æ læk tè ræd èp”å’ wìt”ş. Sōcèl mēt”ēè ùs” è k”rā’ plās tè tōk tè pēpèl hū cìè yè pecèn
Aĭ làf¯ laingvüj¯ĭs¯. Aĭ laĭk tuu raĭt üp¯aùu wœt¯s¯. Süùçül mœt¯ĭjü ĭs¯ ü k¯reĭt pleĭs tü tok tü pīpl huu çeü jo paiçün
A lav längwïjïz. A lai^ te vhai^ bäu^ wëdz. Seushü mèdïe ïz e gräi^ pläis te to^ te pipel u shëe je päshen.

How social media can change the world

Human society has always worked on a very simple principle

People do things and they continue to do them until someone tells them to stop. They either acquiesce or they fight (and sometimes win).

Everyone has different ideas on how things should work, and sometimes people have even started wars over it. Sometimes wars are about who should be the leader or about resources but sometimes they are more about ideas.

We gave this principle a very simple name: power

Who has power and how does it work?

In tribal times, it was the tribal chief, who was physically strong, charismatic and liked by those around him that had the power. Power is very simply the ability to do things without impedance, and the ability to get people to do things for you.

In a community of people, organisation is imperative. It can be draconian or liberal, but it requires some sort of agreement amongst the agents in that community of who decides what they should do.

In feudal times, it was the king, with his access to wealth, and a standing army, that was able to convince people either by threat or actual violence to do what he wanted.

In pre internet capitalism, it was the industry magnate, using his massive wealth as a bargain chip, that got his way.

But the internet has changed everything.

The reason for this is actually very simple. It has democratised communication, which has profound implications for power.

The key to getting power is getting people to come along with you. Throughout history, various strategies have been used to convince people (I gave a few examples before). The core of it really, is language and politics.

No matter if you are a chief or an emperor, you absolutely need to get people to go along with you. Chief, kings, CEOs and emperors have all failed because they failed to understand this very fundamental aspect of human relations. Power has never, and will never exist as an abstract entity.

You can never just grab actual power. It is only ever be done through people. I know it seems obvious that power doesn’t actually exist. It’s only a metaphor to explain human relations. But emperors and kings have fallen because they think it is the crown, or gold, or shares, or ships, or knights that bring power. It has and always will be people to have power and leaders who try to go against this always end up failing.

How does this tie into social media, I hear you ask?

A huge part of the dynamics of power is the ability to have people listen to you (because you are important enough to listen to) and to ability to put a message out. Social media has democratised communication.

A large part of why the American colonists were able to win the revolutionary war is because their leaders were much closer than the British army in America. It was much easier to communicate and to organise.

Local newspapers would write stories about the things the British were doing and this would affect the local population. The people running the newspapers had the power to put out any story they wish. This ability to communicate to a wide audience was not available to everyone.

Traditional media before the internet had a huge amount of power. They could promote politicians, artists, authors or anything else they liked.

If you wanted to make a living making media, you had to get a large media company to support you. It was just not possible to get a message out there by yourself. You would have to get help from a media company.

The internet has changed things though because now everyone can get a message out. We still rely on infrastructure like artists in pre internet times relied on a media company, but this time the platforms are for the most part agnostic as to what happens on them.

The infrastructure which was closely guarded before and only a set few were allowed to use is now available for all. The changes in media over the last couple of decades are already showing what is possible. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Reddit allow many people to get their message out that wouldn’t have been able to speak to such a large audience before.

The recent United Airlines debacle was only possible because people filmed it and put it up online for millions to see. Brian Williams was caught in a lie by someone who was able to send a message through social media.

Let me sum up my thoughts on social media and then I will conclude with addressing the title of this article.

Social media is a revolution in communication. Anyone can get their message out and that message can go around the world. This is completely different than any other stage in history. Communication is at the core of the human experience and being able to communicate with millions of people around the world is a revolutionary development.

So, you might ask, how can social media change the world?

This really goes to the core of the human experience. Power is a nebulous and ephemeral thing that nonetheless has a huge effect on our world.

Can things change in this complex world of ours? Are things destined to be driven only by those at the top? No, not anymore. We all are able to make a choice now to let our voices be heard.

Now more than ever we can have our say and actually have our messages go further than just our local community. Our message can go around the world.

Let me close this by going back to the beginning. People will continue to do things until someone tells them to stop. We are all social beings. We learn from our surroundings. If we only ever hear one message, we will only ever know one way of doing things. Social media is allowing the whole world to connect, and that is already starting to change things and I can’t wait to see what the future holds.

So next time you feel guilty because you have been spending too much time on Facebook sharing cat pictures, just know that you are, in your own small way, changing the world 😉

All tea, no shade

By Patience Kelly

An aspiring linguist’s guide to drag/gay lingo

This article contains profanity especially in connotation with reproductive organs, this article does not intend to offend, merely inform and entertain.

You ready for this extravaganza eleganza? Well, you betta werk. Even before I was less obsessed with the wonderful world of languages as I am now, I loved RuPaul’s Drag Race. I can’t do make up, I’m not that good at fashion, but throw a man into a dress, wig, and cha cha heels and I’m sold. What’s more is this show delves into the soul of not only it’s contestants (look no further than Katya’s admissions of drug addiction, Roxxy Andrew’s emotional break down about being left at a bus stop by her mother, or last week’s honest conversation about the Pulse massacre on the gay community.) But it also reaches into the caverns of gay society itself, bringing it’s icons, music, and language into the limelight.

Coined “lavender linguistics” by Gershon Legman in 1941, the speech patterns many of those in the LGBT community are in reality, it’s own language and show that how we speak is not necessarily tied  to gender, but rather sexual orientation, and of course others we identify with. Through shared ideas, and struggles, many gay men and lesbians have created speech communities which also share patterns of speaking.  Membership into these communities is usually based on stereotypes but speakers resist the dominant language using their own to protest, in a way. These differing patterns, and protest lead to a wider grasp of language within gay men and lesbians as parodies imply gay men speak “like girls” when actually, they are using more varied speech than a stereotypical straight or “manly” man. Like many other social communities, specific vocabulary can be used to include or exclude outsiders, and establish identity.

In addition, lesbians and gay men differ in that when lesbians speak, more emphasis is on being a woman than being gay, and this is reflected in speech, however, both have distinctive slang.

For lesbians, ‘dyke’ now has a positive connotation within the community whereas previously it was an insult. For transgender people, clitorises may be referred to as ‘cocks’ and penises as ‘girl dicks’ thus helping the transitioning person cope with parts that may not match gender identities, but as this is about drag lingo specifically, I’ll also be giving you some examples of drag words and words used typically amongst gay men. I know there’s a lot of articles out there like this at the moment but this will be my take, along with some historical information I’ve gained through the documentary Paris is Burning. So, lets get to werk.

‘Werk, is really an inflection of work, particularly implying some sort of achievement, ‘you betta werk’ means, you have to show them what you’ve got. Or ‘serve’ it ‘serve’ in this sense means to present yourself.  With any luck, you’ll be serving ‘fish’ which usually implies vagina, or looking like a biological woman. And you’ll have others ‘gagging’ gag in this sense usually implies critics choking on the vomit of their jealousy, or reacting intensely. You do not want to get ‘read’ which usually implies to insult, although it’s important to note ‘shade’ ‘tea’ and ‘reading’ are all forms of insulting, or gossiping and usually seem to be in a loving manner although it is not unlikely to be ‘read to shreds’ or ‘throw major shade’ which is usually negative. ‘Tea’ is the gossipier of these, usually reading someone you’re not speaking to or who is not around, gathering information and spreading gossip of others. It’s also important to know that reading is considered an art form one should not attempt unless an expert at the shady arts.

What the F@%$ – Profanity in Language

By Patience Kelly

Literally, profane means outside the temple, and originally had religious connotations, involving “desecrating what is holy”, and representing blasphemy. In English, most swear words have Germanic roots, and documents of swearing in the Bible go back to as early as 1611. An average person uses profane language anywhere from 0% to 3.4% of our spoken words, outnumbering even our first person pronouns (we, us, our) which is used about 1% of the time. Swearing can help neurologists make a distinction as to whether someone has Alzheimers or frontotemporal dementia and according to some, may help anger management. But those who look at language and psychology can all agree. Cursing is a human universal.

While difficult to define, all profanity offends, with varying levels of offensiveness or severity and brings into question things like free speech and freedom of the press, that is, what exactly can be said on tv or the radio. But arguably, profanity is the most powerful words of all. They have direct lines to emotion, and allow you to express your pain or purposely offend. Perhaps most importantly of all, they prove words have power. Power to be spanked as a child, or chastised as an adult, power to be banned from tv and radio, and of course the power to offend, and be offended. Another theory also states that profanity is actually rarely meaningless

Follow just about any click bait website and you’ll see ‘studies’ that prove swearing means you’re dumber, or swearing means you’re more honest, but in one experiment, research showed that the one thing swearing probably could do was help you endure pain. Students were asked to submerge their hands in freezing water for as long as they could, one group was allowed to use profanity and the other used neutral words, one that they might use to describe something, then the groups were allowed to switch types of words. 73% of the students who swore were able to keep their hands submerged for longer. Around 31 seconds to be exact. The study speculates that swearing may produce endorphins within the body.

New questions have emerged in the digital age, such as whether one can swear through emojis, and this adds to the already somewhat tumultuous world of profanity. What is swearing’s purpose in society? Does swearing have grammar? Do men and women swear differently? And if so, how? The one thing that is definite, is that profanity will continue to be something that is debated, and questioned ad nauseam.

How media sensations changed the way we speak

By Patience Kelly

Art mimics life, and this is no different for linguistics. We talk like people we can relate to, who have similar ideas to us, not necessarily who we see (or hear rather). But, as with most things there are exceptions. Around twenty-two years ago, the movie Clueless hit theatres and changed the way teenage girls shopped, but more importantly introduced and spread what most of us have come to know and love (or hate); the valley girl.

This is a trope that initially seems ditzy, loves shopping, plaid miniskirts and more than anything loves the phrase “as if”. “Oh my GOD!”, “whatever”, “rad”, and of course “clueless” are a few iconic examples of this ‘dialect’. It’s not as though the movie completed invented this way of speaking, but it did help bring it into the main stream in a huge way. Language fads tend to be just that, dying in a very short period of time, but to this day people still use “like” and “all” in ways like this: “She was all, where are you going? And I’m like, to the mall!”

Some linguists even argue that Clueless influenced a vowel shift in California changing “dude” to “dewd”. What’s more is that this is not the only shows to elicit a similar response. Another cult classic TV show (that turned twenty in the last two weeks) called Buffy the Vampire Slayer has huge impacts on the way a huge number of its fans and others speak.

Clueless and Buffy are similar in the way of the blond, seemingly ditzy girl is the heroine, in Clueless, our heroine Claire is shown to be what might be surprisingly smart, and in Buffy, she alone can conquer the forces of darkness. She is the chosen one, a vampire slayer, with super strength, and just so happens to be a cheerleader, at least for one episode.

This series not only introduced slang like “slayage”, “vamps”, “wiggins”, and “big bad” to everyday conversation, but trades on references to pop culture by shifting proper nouns into other parts of speech, like verbs and adjectives like in the Halloween episode of Octover 96 where Xander remarks “Halloween quiet? I figured it would have been a big ole vamp scareapalooza.”

Both Buffy and Clueless use the word ‘much’ in unexpected ways like ‘excuse much’ which tries to convey “excuse (you) much”. Buffy also uses suffixes on any and every word imaginable; “Buffyness”, “kissage”, “glowery”, and “foreheady” are all examples. This is a speech pattern I follow in my own life, shifting just about anything to be an adjective.

Another interesting change in usage is shifting adjectives to nouns like; “what’s with the grim?”, “stop with the crazy”, and even “making time go all David Lynch.” Made up compound words like “net girl”, and “perception girl” play with the word form and meaning, and this word play is what makes Buffy truly unique.

These plays on words to create new meaning, new layers, and new jokes add a whole other dimension to the world that is Buffy in both a comedic yet tragic yet dramatic scene and a completely ordinary high school teenager young adult fiction way.

Old English Electricity

By Timothy Patrick Snyder

Old English is a fantastic language.  There is a large selection of literature, with poetry and prose, we have an Old English lexicon that includes several thousand words (although spelling and dialectal variants also take up a decent amount of entries).  There is definitely enough in the lexicon to speak it and compose new literature.  

However, new concepts and inventions could make daily speaking difficult. That’s where neologisms can fill in the lexical gaps.  Some may just be a newly minted meaning to an old word, which is not an uncommon practice in modern languages.  Some may even just require new endings to existing words.  Others maybe be conceptual compounds that combine to make a new meaning. In languages such as Old English, compounding was already common practice, so this can actually feel more authentic.  Although I use from all three of these styles for new Old English words.

Someone might ask why I just use loan words.  That’s a legitimate way to introduce new words. Even the Anglo-Saxons were known to borrow a few words from Latin (like planeta).  It’s true, and one can borrow words, but loanwords lose a bit of the original linguistic flavor.  However I see no reason not to have them, or both a neologisms and loanword.  Some words perhaps should only be loanwords, like some animals or plants, and obviously brand names.

For this article, I’d like to introduce terms related to something we use every day in the modern world but didn’t exist to the Anglo-Saxons, and that’s electricity.   Electricity is a necessary part of our lives and powers our world.  Its usage has lead to millions of new inventions which many of us cannot live without.

I present three terms for electricity, with a fourth as a shortened form of two of them.  The first approach I took to this was to determine the origin of electricity.  The word is rooted in Latin electrum amber, and the new word electricus like amber, was coined by William Gilbert in 1600.  This was then loaned into various languages, including English.  http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=electric&allowed_in_frame=0

With that in mind, I present glærlīcnes electricity and glærlīc electrical, electronic derived from glær amber.  It’s a pretty straightforward neologism.

The next two are compounds which have their own logic.  The first is spearcstrēam electricity, which is a compound of spearca spark and strēam stream, current.  The adjective to match this term would be spearcstrīme electrical, electronic. In the same vein is the word līgetstrēam, which is a mix of līget lightning and strēam stream, yielding the adjective līgetstrīme electrical.  These also can double as meaning electrical current.  This leads to the most obvious short form strēam electricity and strīme electrical, which also corresponds to the German word Strom, which can mean electricity, power, stream, current, etc.

My primary source was the Bosworth-Toller Dictionary, which can be found digitally at http://www.bosworthtoller.com/ .  

Northern Cities Vowel Shift

Hi guys. It’s Rolf Weimar here, creator of Silly Linguistics. I have been working hard on language podcasts, comics and articles. But I would like to expand the language offering on this site. So with that in mind, I put out a call for contributors and I got many responses. Thank you to all who responded.

One person stood above the rest though. They showed enthusiasm and a desire to bring interesting language stuff to a greater audience. I would like to introduce Patience Kelly who will be writing a weekly article for this website. Here is Patience’s article. I hope you enjoy 🙂

Northern Cities Vowel Shift

I’ve lived in Chicago my entire life, and whenever I go anywhere else in the U.S. I always get asked “you’re from Chicago, aren’t you?” If you’ve ever seen a movie like The Blues Brothers or seen that SNL skit about the super fans, you might know why that is. I might not sound exactly as overexaggerated but my ‘Chicago’ is more like ‘ChicAHgo’ and my ‘sausage’ like ‘sAUGHsage’. This may be due to a linguistic phenomenon known as the Northern Cities Vowel Shift.

From Upstate New York through the Midwest and into Minnesota and the Dakotas, what was originally a simple shift of the tongue forward and up moved ‘man’ towards ‘men’ which started a domino effect on the rest of our vowel sounds. ‘Busses’ becomes ‘bosses’ and so on. This goes to show that firstly people’s accents are not as affected by the media as originally thought but also, people in the boundaries of this vowel shift are becoming more distant, linguistically.

The shift began being documented in the 50’s in Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, and Rochester adding up to about 34 million people. Most of the country has no distinction between words like ‘cot’ and ‘caught’, or ‘don’ and ‘dawn’ but within the northern cities the ‘wha’ sounds of ‘caught’ and ‘dawn’ are clearly audible. This shift seems drastically similar to the one occurring in the 1400-1600’s transforming middle English to modern English.

One theory linguists have offered as to why this shift stops just south of Cleveland and west of Milwaukee is politics. Linguists such as William Labov offer that you’re more likely to speak like people you can relate to, so while southern Illinoisans tend to have a soft southern drawl, Chicagoans follow the Northern Cities Shift possibly because Chicago is in reality a small liberal diaspora within a vast sea of conservatives.

Another speculation made by Lebov suggests that the Erie Canal brought immigrants east drawing different dialects, as well as accents together. Many in the east (places like Rochester and Buffalo) made a huge leap in population on imports of Midwestern wheat and possibly drew pop (pahp) from where soda had previously been and similarity in blacks (city blocks laid out on a grid pattern) in Chicago and Manhattan were conceived of German stonemasonry so followed a similarity in pronunciation.

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/06/25/great-steak-break-yeats/

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5220090

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/03/28/votes-and-vowels-a-changing-accent-shows-how-language-parallels-politics/#.WMixC_nyvcc

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2012/08/northern_cities_vowel_shift_how_americans_in_the_great_lakes_region_are_revolutionizing_english_.html

Come live on the silly side of life