I notice a little bit of the California dialect in my speech, but mostly in relaxed social settings. Most of the time I am in structured or professional settings, but I do use words like, ‘like,’ ‘dawg,’ ‘bites,’ ‘tight,’ ‘sick,’ and maybe some others, but I’m not quite ‘up’ with the dialect yet so most of these I use very seldom.
As far as California being ahead in linguistic matters, I think it is accurate in the sense that the evolution of their English is further along, since this dialect is used more often there than most other places. California is one of the biggest surfing locations in the United States and a lot of this vocabulary seems to come from surfers. This could possibly be a reason why this dialect emerged quicker in California. This dialect would spread eastward rather than westward because of all the different nationalities in California who might make up their own interpretations of the English language.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Thursday, February 21, 2008
californian dialect
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Californian dialect
In any language, we can see a variable diversity. In American English, because of social aspects that diversity the most recognizable and colorful. Population in United States consists from the different ethnic groups, communities, because that country is an immigrant’s land. Therefore, it is not surprisingly that we have the most large linguistical diversity around the world. For example, large ethnic group of Mexican-American population in California created their own dialect Chicano English. Usually it is very common in the area bilingual speakers to mix native language with second language. Grammar, lexicon pass between two language with specific adaptation. Minor ethnic group uses special “lingustical glue” to adopt both languages in one surge. In addition, because today Hispanic speakers have a great population in California Americans also adopted some innovations in American English. Also a great influence on language played Chinese and Japan ethnic groups, which had their settlement since 1950 yy. after a Second World War. Another influence was created by Hollywood images. All that lingustical innovations depended from social and historical aspects. As any language American English transformed in a new form and will be have other transformations while political, historical and demographical aspects will be have developing.
Californian dialect
In any language, we can see a variable diversity. In American English, because of social aspects that diversity the most recognizable and colorful. Population in United States consists from the different ethnic groups, communities, because that country is an immigrant’s land. Therefore, it is not surprisingly that we have the most large linguistical diversity around the world. For example, large ethnic group of Mexican-American population in California created their own dialect Chicano English. Usually it is very common in the area bilingual speakers to mix native language with second language. Grammar, lexicon pass between two language with specific adaptation. Minor ethnic group uses special “lingustical glue” to adopt both languages in one surge. In addition, because today Hispanic speakers have a great population in California Americans also adopted some innovations in American English. Also a great influence on language played Chinese and Japan ethnic groups, which had their settlement since 1950 yy. after a Second World War. Another influence was created by Hollywood images. All that lingustical innovations depended from social and historical aspects. As any language American English transformed in a new form and will be have other transformations while political, historical and demographical aspects will be have developing.
Post 5--the Californian Dialect
In the reading for Thursday, we learned about the dialect that is emerging in California, and how that dialect is spreading across the country--and beyond. For example, the use of "like" has become ubiquitous in most English speaking communities. This language use developed out of "Valspeak" (Valley Girl dialect) in the 1980s and spread via multiple media outlets (radio, film) and has continued to move across most speech communities.
The reading also introduced the dialect marker of "uptalk," or rising inflection at the end of statements. Instead of saying, "I went to the store today." with a declining inflection, it sounds like "I went to the store? today?" with a rising inflection. I personally notice that I have incorporated this inflection in my own dialect. I attribute it to a colleague in the English department whom I work closely with, but it is likely from a combination of factors, including the general progression of the California dialect. What markers of the California dialect do you notice in yourself and in those you know?
The chapter indicates that California is often "ahead" of the rest of the nation in many matters, political, social, economic...and also linguistic. Does this seem accurate to you? Why would a new dialect emerge more quickly in California than in other areas of the country? And, why would this dialect spread eastward from California, when the historic migration of dialect has been westward since the U.S. was settled by English colonists?
Please respond to this, and also please contribute any other interesting findings you had while reading "Language from a State of Change."
Thanks,
Tiffany
The reading also introduced the dialect marker of "uptalk," or rising inflection at the end of statements. Instead of saying, "I went to the store today." with a declining inflection, it sounds like "I went to the store? today?" with a rising inflection. I personally notice that I have incorporated this inflection in my own dialect. I attribute it to a colleague in the English department whom I work closely with, but it is likely from a combination of factors, including the general progression of the California dialect. What markers of the California dialect do you notice in yourself and in those you know?
The chapter indicates that California is often "ahead" of the rest of the nation in many matters, political, social, economic...and also linguistic. Does this seem accurate to you? Why would a new dialect emerge more quickly in California than in other areas of the country? And, why would this dialect spread eastward from California, when the historic migration of dialect has been westward since the U.S. was settled by English colonists?
Please respond to this, and also please contribute any other interesting findings you had while reading "Language from a State of Change."
Thanks,
Tiffany
Monday, February 18, 2008
Talking backwards...
When looking at the two gay marriage websites in class and how they presented their views and ideas about the legality of gay marriage as well as its personal and intimate meanings, I thought it was interesting how each implied that their view was the absolute correct one. When I think of gay marriage the issue of religion always pops up in my head; how the bible is used to reassure that marriage is only to be shared between a man and a woman and if that rule were broken it would be considered a sin. Not that committing a sin is going to stop a gay couple from attempting to pursue marriage, but its religion over personal value; religion over law in some cases. They use the bible and whats been labeled as traditional values to implicate a naturalized reality. The KKK's website and how they use religion to imply that their working for God and spreading love, when really their focus is not on treating every human fairly and that white individuals are the predominantly favored. I don't think these values are anywhere in the bible. Its always about who's backing you up. I believe the comment was made that the website against gay marriage was much nicer, probably had many sponsors and funding to rely on its writers and designers where as the the pro gay marriage site was grassroots and more about personal relations. History is our only option when looking at discourse and how its used now. How people use things of the past to reassure the present; discourse is everything its been brought up to be and people are endlessly going to shape reality with it as we progress into a more individualized state of being.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
The Language Naturalization of "Political Talk".
One of the most frustrating forms of language ‘naturalization’ is within politics. The discourse used in governmental positions is shrouded in both ideological and historical background. The source of political discourse lay in the hands of those who wrote the constitution and the time period in which it was practiced. Even during this time period however, I believe that this type of political discourse was created to keep others out of federal government decision-making. Furthermore, it has created a barrier between ordinary people and those in government. Those who contributed in the creation and debate of democracy were well educated, upper-class white men. And although the constitution proved to benefit the people in which it was written for, it is disproportionate in the benefits given to the authors themselves.
The early debate between Federalist and Anti-federalists was fraught with disagreement about the potential of ‘ordinary’ people to participate in government decisions. Some of the most renowned founders can be cited, referring to the masses as “ A bewildered herd, fraught with fleets of passion, and incapable of making rational decisions.” And although the constitution revolves around those revered phrases such as “By the people, for the people”, the overhanging power is most certainly within government. This hidden ideology is very much apparent in today’s democracy. The very people who are supposed to actively participate are feeling powerless and insignificant.
Perhaps that reason for this is due to a lack of understanding. When I turn on the television and listen to C-Span for example, I am sometimes confused by what they are talking about. And although I understand both current issues within government and the general system in which it functions, sometimes I feel like I’m listening to another language. It is obvious that people who hold governmental positions are well educated people, with this comes an elevated ability to utilize this ‘language’ in order to function within the system. But when everyone within this institution is speaking in a way that they understand one another, it does not mean that people outside of it can. How can people be expected to participate if we cannot understand one another on an agreed plane of dialog? If citizens wish to be active and aware of political working, they must first understand the lingo.
My assertion here, is that the type of dialect used within the political realm is purposefully used as a tool to keep people out. Furthermore, it has been naturalized within society to mean nothing more than “political talk”.
The early debate between Federalist and Anti-federalists was fraught with disagreement about the potential of ‘ordinary’ people to participate in government decisions. Some of the most renowned founders can be cited, referring to the masses as “ A bewildered herd, fraught with fleets of passion, and incapable of making rational decisions.” And although the constitution revolves around those revered phrases such as “By the people, for the people”, the overhanging power is most certainly within government. This hidden ideology is very much apparent in today’s democracy. The very people who are supposed to actively participate are feeling powerless and insignificant.
Perhaps that reason for this is due to a lack of understanding. When I turn on the television and listen to C-Span for example, I am sometimes confused by what they are talking about. And although I understand both current issues within government and the general system in which it functions, sometimes I feel like I’m listening to another language. It is obvious that people who hold governmental positions are well educated people, with this comes an elevated ability to utilize this ‘language’ in order to function within the system. But when everyone within this institution is speaking in a way that they understand one another, it does not mean that people outside of it can. How can people be expected to participate if we cannot understand one another on an agreed plane of dialog? If citizens wish to be active and aware of political working, they must first understand the lingo.
My assertion here, is that the type of dialect used within the political realm is purposefully used as a tool to keep people out. Furthermore, it has been naturalized within society to mean nothing more than “political talk”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)