No, you are explaining it very well. Although mass communication is affecting regional accents in the world, and not always postively in my small opinion, isolated areas in Britain and the U.S. can still understand each other better than most citizens living in Britain and the US can. I had a professor in college that would read passages from Shakespeare and Chaucer as closely as was known then to "original" pronunciation, and I found it fascinating to hear what sounded like French and Scottish words within early modern English. We also read some passages ourselves reprinted from the oldest surviving source aloud after being told to start by pronouncing the words as they were spelled. Of course, the caveat was that we were also told that we might be closer to how the typesetter pronounced the words, rather than Chaucer or Shakespeare. I fear we are losing a lot of expression within languages through the present mass-media homogenization.
Cindy Abel -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Exstock Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 1:36 PM To: Historical Costume Subject: Re: [h-cost] OT Re: Regional accents, was Making history hip ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Anne Baumgartner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ... And a friend who works at the stage supply company says she can > always recognize one particular community- theater box office tape on > the phone because the speaker "has a phony British accent, which > people seem to equate with being artistes!" > (No offense intended to any true Brits out there who ARE artistes, or > to Cockneys who ARE refined!) Reminds me of a favorite line from some movie I can't think of: "Is she British, or just affected?" The whole topic, though, reminds me of something that I love to research when I have a spare second: the development of the American (and British) accent. I always wondered what, for example, people like Benjamin Franklin actually sounded like when they talked. I mean, it would make sense that their accents would be a lot closer to modern British than modern American, right? As it turns out, no, but not the other way round, either. If anyone in the 18th century sounded like anyone in the 21st century, it was the 18thC Brits; they sounded like 21st century Americans. Apparently the Brits had this thing for following linguistic fashions, which the Americans largely ignored, leaving regional British accents almost intact in the associated American regions. (Although we did finally follow suit and rid ourselves of that whole thing where the "a" in "father" sounded like the "a" in modern-American-accent "apple," though. Whew.) OK, completely off topic, and I'm explaining it poorly anyway! -E House _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
