origin of dese dem dose in NYCE

[Joel S. Berson]

At 2/12/2012 01:49 PM, Victor Steinbok wrote:
>Wouldn't lack of these features in Downstate speech be sufficient to
>negate the Dutch theory? If Dutch influence were responsible, shouldn't
>it be heard all along the Hudson?

Because the Dutch in the Hudson River Valley were patrician
landholders of vast estates, and the Dutch in New York City were the
lower sorts?  (I've lost track of where "it" is heard  -- NYC, up
river, or both.)

Joel


>     VS-)
>
>
>On 2/12/2012 11:12 AM, Dan Goncharoff wrote:
>>As a matter of history, New Amsterdam was the only large Dutch
>>settlement in North America. They had smaller villages on the
>>Connecticut, Hudson and Delaware rivers: the Puritans threw them out
>>off the Connecticut, the Swedes replaced them on the Delaware, only
>>the Hudson River contingent remained after the British takeover.
>>DanG
>>
>>
>>
>>On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Ronald Butters<ronbutters at aol.com>  wrote:
>>>Isn't it the case that this phenomenon is by no means confined to
>>>New York? Did the Dutch settle Boston  and New Orleans too? And
>>>the situation is compounded by the fact that in syllable-final
>>>position, one also hears [f].
>>>
>>>
>>>On Feb 11, 2012, at 8:02 PM, Dan Goncharoff wrote:
>>>>I am very confused. I was under the impression that the use of
>>>>articles starting with a d instead of th started in NYC about 350
>>>>years ago, when the town was called New Amsterdam. The Dutch
>>>>never left, and I suspect their influence on the NY accent didn't, either.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org