In fact, dislike of a particular pronunciation is irrational, and almost always has a psychological hangup or cultural prejudice behind it
MikeL wrote:One of the most interesting developments in NZ English within the last generation is the coalescence of the two diphthongs found in the words "fair" and "fear" or "rear" and "rare". While we older kiwis (or for the politically correct, those of us who have had more life experience)clearly distinguish these pairs, younger people tend to pronounce them identically, with a sound half-way between the two.
I am not aware of this development in English dialects outside N.Z.
Lee wrote:bender wrote:
Yes, that was the most notable feature of the NZ accent when I first heard it. Even in Australia they don't pronounce those pairs identically!
Really? Whereabouts in Australia where you?
MikeL wrote:(A good way to distinguish a NZer from an Australian is to get him or her to say "fish and chips"; the Ocker will say "feesh and cheeps" - with a vowel that is longer and much more frontalized).
this "ocker" says "feesh and cheeps".
Australian English is actually transitioning from British English to American English. It's only a matter of time before the accent is American.
And, in Auckland, the NZ English spoken here is actually becoming more Australianised. I noticed it when I heard every sentence end "higher" than in the beginning of the sentence.
Perfect nonsense. Australian English is becoming more Australian. The pronounciations of words which differ non-systematically is sometimes converting to the American pronounciation, true, (e.g. CONtroVERsy vs conTROVersy or kla:k vs klø:k) but that's happening in Britain too. The values of phonemes keeps changing in more novel ways, there's no sign of rhotacism, and in any case, in these cases there's no single American English to try and creep towards.
In word choice, Australia can be more conservative than Britain: We say 'tomato sauce' (or simply 'sauce'), whereas Brits've adopted the American 'ketchup'. 'Chook' seems to have fallen out of our formal register, and the birds are a lot less common in modern urban speech than the meat, but informal registers are common enough in Oz that it's unlikely to be completely replaced by 'chicken' anytime soon. (Note for Otherlanders: 'chook' is an Australian word for the thing that when you kill, cook and cut up becomes 'chicken'. To me, 'chicken' is an uncountable noun referring to a form of food, like 'beef' or 'pork'.)
Felix the Cassowary wrote:Our grammar is also diverging: Aussies prefer present participles (with contractions), but Americans prefer simple pasts.
MikeL wrote:Felix the Cassowary wrote:Our grammar is also diverging: Aussies prefer present participles (with contractions), but Americans prefer simple pasts.
Present participles / simple pasts? Don't quite understand this. Can you give an example?
Triple J radio Sydney, 22 March 2000, via Engel and Ritz wrote:... a guy in Mexico, he said [...] 'I reckon we should go to the zoo, but we shouldn't go there when it's open, we should go there when it's night time [...].' And so <i>he's jumped</i> the fence with a few friends, and went over to the lion enclosure and <i>he's dropped</i> his mobile phone into the lion enclosure. [[...]] Now the funny thing is [...] that he just jumped the fence, went into the lion enclosure to get his phone, <i>he's walked up</i> to his phone and the phone <i>has started</i> ringing, <i>it's set</i> the lions right off because [...] lions, apparently don't like novelty chimes, they just like the normal 'ring ring', and when they heard the novelty chime, set them right off and attacked the guy. Didn't kill him, but they attacked him, and he was lucky to escape with his life and his Motorola phone.
And talking of verbs, what is the situation regarding the replacement of the Pluperfect Tense in conditional sentences with the new compounded Pluperfect ("If I had've done that...") Is this a home-grown development or an imported Americanism?
Felix the Cassowary wrote:(D. M. Engel & M.-E. A. Ritz, 2000, 'The use of the Present perfect in Australian English', Australian Journal of Linguistics, 20(2)), which provides numerous ones (from the radio, which was their source), like
- In the morning <i>he's stuck</i> an 'I love Redman' sticker on her back (Radio chat show)
- He <i>has</i> now <i>met</i> with Ayres this morning (Radio news)
- After the collision, the vehicle <i>has sped off</i> (Radio news)
- A man <i>has been</i> injured when the tanker he was driving crashed into [...] (Radio news)
Felix the Cassowary wrote:The values of phonemes keeps changing in more novel ways, there's no sign of rhotacism, and in any case, in these cases there's no single American English to try and creep towards.
riki wrote:In Sydney, and in many places in Australia, the speech is becoming more American.
riki wrote:Australian English is actually transitioning from British English to American English. It's only a matter of time before the accent is American.
riki wrote:The spelling and speech in Sydney is certainly becoming more Americanized - in fact, it is a fear that many Australians have that the English spoken in Australia will become more American due to influences from American television on Australia TV.
Felix the Cassowary wrote:(e.g. CONtroVERsy vs conTROVersy or kla:k vs klø:k) but that's happening in Britain too.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests