8.1220, Disc: British <a>

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-8-1220. Sat Aug 23 1997. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 8.1220, Disc: British <a>

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            T. Daniel Seely: Eastern Michigan U. <seely at linguistlist.org>

Review Editor:     Andrew Carnie <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Associate Editors: Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
                   Ann Dizdar <ann at linguistlist.org>
Assistant Editor:  Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Zhiping Zheng <zzheng at online.emich.edu>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/


Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:  bwald at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU (benji wald)
Subject:  Re: 8.1205, Disc: British <a>

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:  bwald at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU (benji wald)
Subject:  Re: 8.1205, Disc: British <a>

Peter Tan wrote:

It seems to me that the evidence for 'aggressive'
nativisation/anglicisation in southern British English as opposed to
American English is not clear.

In my last lengthy message I did not react to this issue.  My reaction
is that I agree with Peter.  I don't know if some of the unclarity has
to do with different historical periods which differentiate British
and American English, or different cultural domains, e.g., music
(e.g., Italian terms like stacatto and the others I mentioned in the
last message) vs. foods (e.g., pasta -- and more recently a bunch of
Mexican foods, e.g., taco, tamale, etc etc) -- or both etc etc.
However, reversals of the 'agressive' Southern Brit expectation
include some of the commonest and widely known foods, such as "tomato"
and "banana" where undoubtedly the Southern Brit "back a"
pronunciation is closer to the source than the American pronunciation
(lengthened and raised "tomAto" as in "day" and "mate") and "banana"
rhyming in American English with "Anna" which has "front a", not "back
a" as in the "Continental" European pronunciation of the same name.
"tomato", of course, is perhaps the earliest "Mexican" food to become
a widespread word in English.  As for Jim Fiedelholz's observation on
Brit "NicaragYua", also striking is Brit (and Canadian) "bilingYual".
At least "bilingYual" could be considered conservative if it is
modelled on the French pronunciation with a FRONT labio-velar "w", as
in "figYure" (for those of you who don't pronounce it as "figger").
                --  Benji

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-8-1220