American voices

[jayne lee wilson]

I don't think, according to "our" principles, that (any) accent should alone be a criterion for exclusion/exclusion. Speaking without special knowledge on the subject (che novità!), these may be newly fled refugees seeking British citizenship.

That said, I am an RP supporter since I consider this a 'neutral accent', there being no region of England, north or south, that does not have its own regional/local accent according to outside ears. Having a standardised, general purpose accent seems to me to have its uses. And as with individuals, some accents annoy, others attract; and some seem to be favoured while others are (unofficially) excluded. No egalitarianism there.

So my solution would be to send these Americans - if they are to be regular BBC staff, not if they are occasional contributors - to the BBC School for Received Pronunciation. As contributors, as Alpie says, the proof of their worth lies in what they say.

Spoof or sincere? YOU decide!

[Ein Heldenleben]

I don't think, according to "our" principles, that (any) accent should alone be a criterion for exclusion/exclusion. Speaking without special knowledge on the subject (che novità!), these may be newly fled refugees seeking British citizenship.

That said, I am an RP supporter since I consider this a 'neutral accent', there being no region of England, north or south, that does not have its own regional/local accent according to outside ears. Having a standardised, general purpose accent seems to me to have its uses. And as with individuals, some accents annoy, others attract; and some seem to be favoured while others are (unofficially) excluded. No egalitarianism there.

So my solution would be to send these Americans - if they are to be regular BBC staff, not if they are occasional contributors - to the BBC School for Received Pronunciation. As contributors, as Alpie says, the proof of their worth lies in what they say.

I’m not sure that many linguists would consider RP “neutral.” Ever read Lawrence’s poem on the Oxford voice ?

[french frank]

Spoof or sincere? YOU decide!

[CallMePaul]

What annoy me are two Americanisms that I hear more and more on TV and radio (not just BBC stations). The first is split infinitives, even where these seem contrived and unnatural. In most of these cases placing the adverb after the verb seems more appropriate.
The second is American-style dates (eg Jan 6th for today rather than 6th Jan). I am not sure when the American style was first adopted, there or here, but I have seen Tudor era documents using British-style dates. Many Americanisms reflect older usage (eg "diaper" is an older term than "nappy" but has only been retained in America), but I don't think this to be case with date style.

[french frank]

I’m not sure that many linguists would consider RP “neutral.” Ever read Lawrence’s poem on the Oxford voice ?

I did offer a further characteristic: that it isn't a 'regional accent'. Whether it is deemed 'neutral/standard', 'non regional' or whatever is another matter. I would not consider it as a marker of social class either. I know what I consider an 'upper class accent'. I'm not sure what the 'Oxford voice' is, though arguably that might be a variant of the 'regional accent'. In many cases, regional accents become so weakened that they could merge into a single 'centre' accent anyway, not strongly regional while still (just about) being regionally distinctive. People modify their accents consciously and unconsciously. In some cases they will make their accents more distinctive where they have a specific wish to identify with a region.

I think it's a shifting situation, as far attitudes to different accents are concerned, chronologically and from the individual's perspective.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I did offer a further characteristic: that it isn't a 'regional accent'. Whether it is deemed 'neutral/standard', 'non regional' or whatever is another matter. I would not consider it as a marker of social class either. I know what I consider an 'upper class accent'. I'm not sure what the 'Oxford voice' is, though arguably that might be a variant of the 'regional accent'. In many cases, regional accents become so weakened that they could merge into a single 'centre' accent anyway, not strongly regional while still (just about) being regionally distinctive. People modify their accents consciously and unconsciously. In some cases they will make their accents more distinctive where they have a specific wish to identify with a region.

I think it's a shifting situation, as far attitudes to different accents are concerned, chronologically and from the individual's perspective.

The Oxford voice and RP are pretty much synonymous...there’s quite a good summary of R.P. On wiki . It’s gradually being eroded as a ‘status’ or normative accent. Indeed rightly or wrongly a pronounced RP accent might even be a bit of a barrier in broadcasting now...

[french frank]

The Oxford voice and RP are pretty much synonymous...there’s quite a good summary of R.P. On wiki . It’s gradually being eroded as a ‘status’ or normative accent. Indeed rightly or wrongly a pronounced RP accent might even be a bit of a barrier in broadcasting now...

Interesting. Two things: I wonder whether "RP" itself is becoming modified, more flexible, inclusive of mild variation? Secondly, I may be a bit out of date now, but I do have a memory of an even then slightly dated Oxford (University, specifically) accent: just a little bit too carefully enunciated to the point of exaggeration.

[kernelbogey]

My hunch would be that many would consider RP to be the dialect of the Establishment, and therefore representing political, and class, power.

[french frank]

My hunch would be that many would consider RP to be the dialect of the Establishment, and therefore representing political, and class, power.

I'm sure many people would. I wonder, though, whether many so-called RP speakers see themselves in that way, and whether that is the reality. I remember our much-missed Kate Bott referring to herself as 'an RP-speaking woman of advancing years'. Whereas I'm still in awe of her, I wouldn't consider her 'Establishment, and therefore representing political, and class, power'.

I associate RP with lower to middle middle-class meself … The upper classes talk posh.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Interesting. Two things: I wonder whether "RP" itself is becoming modified, more flexible, inclusive of mild variation? Secondly, I may be a bit out of date now, but I do have a memory of an even then slightly dated Oxford (University, specifically) accent: just a little bit too carefully enunciated to the point of exaggeration.

Yes you are right the extreme variant of that would be Brian Sewell - particularly what he did to s’s and e’s. An example of some one who has modified her RP accent over the years would be HM the Queen . If you listen to her very moving speech of commitment to serve the Commonwealth in her twenties and then this year’s Queen’s speech there is quite a difference. Even Tony Blair , educated in Scotland , modifies his RP with glottal stops occasionally . The Queen’s accent is hugely influential still . An interesting variant is the word years - the following tend to say “ yars “ or something midway between years (rhyming with ears ) and yars (rhyming with cars) Nick Witchell BBC Royal Correspondent, Rita Chakrabatri the newsreader and most members of the Royal Family. It is a bit of an RP outrider..

[eighthobstruction]

....personally I'd love to hear 101 Objects Niel MacGregor attempting a football or rugby commentary....

[vinteuil]

An interesting variant is the word years - the following tend to say “ yars “ or something midway between years (rhyming with ears ) and yars (rhyming with cars) Nick Witchell BBC Royal Correspondent, Rita Chakrabatri the newsreader and most members of the Royal Family. It is a bit of an RP outrider..

... for real toffs it is the word 'yes' which is pronounced 'ears'

.

[Leinster Lass]

Annie Proulx could read the shipping forecast.

[DracoM]

Or the lifted cheekbones Islington 'berks' for 'books'?

[jayne lee wilson]

What annoy me are two Americanisms that I hear more and more on TV and radio (not just BBC stations). The first is split infinitives, even where these seem contrived and unnatural. In most of these cases placing the adverb after the verb seems more appropriate.
The second is American-style dates (eg Jan 6th for today rather than 6th Jan). I am not sure when the American style was first adopted, there or here, but I have seen Tudor era documents using British-style dates. Many Americanisms reflect older usage (eg "diaper" is an older term than "nappy" but has only been retained in America), but I don't think this to be case with date style.

Is the split infinitive really an Americanism? It goes back centuries in English writing and usage. ..... why is it seen to be so wrong, anyway, in terms of meaning or coherence, or even elegance? What would such a "rule" against it be for?

"To boldly go where no man has gone before"
"To go boldly where no man has gone before"

Does either sound better, or preferable subjectively, and why?

*****

Growing up in the 60s, teatime TV after school was dominated by American series, sitcoms like I love Lucy or The Dick Van Dyke Show. Or brilliantly inventive, subversive comedies like Bewitched or Mr Ed. The latter caught my imagination and really fed into my instinctive love of animals. Later there was The Man from U.N.C.L.E....

They certainly threw shade upon Blue Peter....
So American accents and idioms were a part of my and many others' linguistic weltanschauung from early on. I never feel uncomfortable hearing them or using them...