Talk:California English/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks for everyone who's edited this page...this was my first wikipedia article and your additions and changes have helped a lot--your changes look great...I plan on adding more text soon and will follow precedence with your format changes, which have contributed to a more esthetically pleasing and informative article. Svenska84 21:59, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Contents

San Francisco naming

The article says "Similarly, Northern California outsiders are likely to mark themselves as such by referring to San Francisco as anything other than San Francisco or the City." Is a 'not' missing, or ? -R. S. Shaw 3 July 2005 23:35 (UTC)

(I wrote this). There's no 'not' missing, but it is a bit confusing. Maybe something like "People not from Northern California are likely to mark themselves as such by calling San Francisco a name that is not San Francisco or the City, like San Fran or Frisco." Nohat 4 July 2005 00:32 (UTC)

How about "People from Northern California have only two names for San Francisco, San Francisco and the City; people from outside the region are likely to mark themselves as such by using other names like San Fran or Frisco."? --Angr/tɔk tə mi 4 July 2005 05:19 (UTC)

Ooo, great minds think alike...I've just updated the text along these lines. -- Beland 4 July 2005 22:03 (UTC)

I'm liable to hurt someone if they refer to the city as "Frisco." Frisco is the name of any of four towns in Texas, Colorado, North Carolina, and Alabama. -- Anonymous Californian


Anyone who was born and raised in the city (San Francisco) knows that it is almost an unspoken rule that you do not call the city "frisco". calling the city frisco is a dead giveaway that you're not from the area. And it really makes you sound ghetto.- S.F. Native

It's actually been my experience that nobody from "the city" calls it San Francisco. It is merely, "the city". Also "the city" is the originating point for new lexicon such as "cutty", and skrilla(actually i believe thats east bay)

Trippy

Being from Massachusetts, I've only heard "trippy" used here in California, after I've moved here, so I added mention of it. - Beland 4 July 2005 21:55 (UTC)

I think it's died off now... I really shouldn't be responding to this as it's exactly a year old now and should probably be in an archive. Theshibboleth 14:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Expansion request: Examples

 Please help improve this article or section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007)

After reading this article, I'm still not quite sure what the distinguishing features of this dialect sound like. I have taken linguistics, so I suppose I could plow through the phonological descriptions in detail, but a spoken or even written example of some typical speech patterns (both in phonology and grammar) would be quite helpful. -- Beland 4 July 2005 22:06 (UTC)

Sounds good. There are indeed many ways this article could be expanded, as there's research and information out there to find and report on. I think I could at least look for some audio clips to link to, and maybe find some transcriptions of Californian speech. Svenska84 10:10, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Tweeker

It's tweeker, dude, not tweaker, and lots of people use "trippy". Maybe not in YOUR exalted neighborhood, but plenty of other places qualify as California, ya know? Cbdorsett 8 July 2005 06:26 (UTC)

Hella and Bro

One thing that might be worth adding is the predominant use of the word "Hella" by Northern Californians to substitute for the words "A lot," or "Extremely." For example, at a crowded restaurant, one might say, "There are hella people here." Its root seems to be a contracton of "A hell of a lot of," although it is also used as a quantifier, often in the phrase "That hella sucks," or, "That's hella awesome, dude." Younger folks who don't want to get in trouble with their parents for swearing will often substitute "Hecka." The word is not used at all in Southern California and is looked down upon as a sign of a NorCal foreigner trying to invade Southern California. About the only time a Southern Californian will utter "Hella" is to deride Northern Californians with a statement along the lines of, "Nor Cal Hella Sucks." Some Southern Californians will use the words "Mass," or "A Mass" instead, words which are not used in Northern California. An example statement would be, "Sorry I'm late brah, but there were mass cars on the 405," though "Mass" does not work as a quantifier in the same way as "Hella" and does not seem to be a crucial part of the Southern California lexicon in the same way that "Hella" is for Northern Californians.

Also, Southern Californians prefer using the word "Bro" (Oftentimes pronounced "Brah") to refer to their friends, wheras Northern Californians will more often use "Dude." Both of these terms are gender neutral, and can be used to refer to either man or woman friends. For example, Southern Californians will greet friends with, "What's up brah?" And Northern Californians will state, "What's up, dude?" Also, potentially worth noting is that "Bro" and "Dude" can be used in a challenging sort of way. If someone somewhat-accidentally pushes you, or somesuch, a common response might be, "What was that about brah?" Or just simply, "Dude?" Both Northern and Southern Californians will also make use of the word "Man" to substitute for "Dude" and "Bro," but Man seems to be slightly more used in Northern California than in Southern California.

I dunno, I just feel that if you are going to be talking about the Californian dialect, it just seems fitting to include these terms which are so strongly entrenched in the vernacular, and seemingly unique to the state. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 208.29.250.2 (talk • contribs) 00:14, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Bro and dude are definitely not unique to the state. Hella and mass might be (I only know "hella" from South Park, which of course takes place in Colorado, but is hardly realistic), but adding them on the basis of personal experience rather than verifiable published sources amounts to original research. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 06:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Hence why I didn't add it to the main page without first mentioning it here. I'd be willing to let the Bro and Dude part slide, though I felt that this information would add to the distinction between Northern and Southern California speech patterns, which would be a seemingly worthy addition to the article. However, I believe that the usage of Hella is at least as valuable to the article as the discussion of the different manners of describing freeways (The 5 vs. 5). It is true, there is no verifiable, documented research regarding the use of "Hella," but is there any documented research on the highway description, or the use of "Bucket" and "Trippy?" I pretty rarely hear "Trippy" used by anyone who is not still living in the 60s, and I cannot recall ever hearing "Bucket." And based on the comment in the discussion page it was just added by a user who finds the words in common use. If you are adamantly opposed to adding the discussion of hella, I will accept that as I am just a guest, but in reading the article I felt as though I had something to add which would clarify the California lexicon. Hella is a NorCal word, through and through, and is used to an excess by its residents. People in So Cal do not understand it. This may amount to "Original Research," but if this is the case then I would argue that portions of the "Lexical Characteristics" section appear to be the same. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 208.29.250.2 (talk • contribs) 16:52, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
I think South Park indeed ruined "Hella". Like most fad words, its use is waning. I can, however, verify that anon's analysis is correct: it was mainly restricted to Northern California, and "Hecka" was a distinctly Southern Californian variant. Curiously, it was used without inflection as both an adverb (That food is hella good) and as an adjective (There are hella people here), although the adjective use is definitely more marked. Many people (such as myself) only use(d) it in the adverb form. I don't know if there has been any scholarly research into "hella", but I imagine someone has. Nohat 18:01, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I believe, my friend, that you are straight tripping if you think "hella" is a fad word. (Please see my post below)
Dude, hella is like all about the East Bay. I'll hear it from my homies in Oaktown, or those down in Freakmont, but if you pay to cross the bay or cruise down 880 past Dixon Landing, it's, like, gone. Gentgeen 18:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Hella is used here in the South Bay too. I think this word is generally restricted to NorCal as Nohat mentioned. It may be further restricted to the Bay Area, and areas in the Central Valley including Sac-town where a lot of Bay Area people have moved to. My friend in Santa Cruz tells he rarely hears the word used there. — J3ff 20:30, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
The funny thing about "bucket" is, I've definitely heard and have even used it myself, but I'm not exactly from California. Both of my parents grew up in L.A., and I was born in Santa Barbara, but we moved away when I was 2, so if there's any California influence in my speech patterns it must have come from my parents. I don't think either of them ever called an old broken-down car a bucket, though. I honestly don't remember where I heard it. I've always thought of it as a clipped form of "rustbucket". --Angr/tɔk tə mi 20:05, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I've never heard "bucket" here to refer to a beaten-down car. As for the "bro" and "dude" thing--I don't think either one is necessarily confined to either nor or so-cal. I've heard both in both parts of the state. I go to UC San Diego and I hear "dude" all the time from so-cal natives who have never lived in nor-cal or any other place for that matter. Svenska84 10:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
I lived in Napa (North Bay) and I don't know many who would say "Dude" is Northern Californian word, because I remember on numerouse ocassion capping on people who used it and not based on geography. I heard "fool" much more often, but it definently seemed more prominent than either dude, or man (which I rarley heard).

I don't know about Dixon but in Napa (and Solano) the word "Hella" is used alot and by no means is a "fad" word. As J3ff said, I think it's much more likley that it's a Bay Area word and after discussing it with about 5 people, for about 8-15 minutes in late 03 we seemed to all agree it was either Napa-Solano, or Bay Area word (depending on which one you asked). I definently think it's unique to California because I recently moved to Arkansas and no one uses it, Arkansas is only one example of but... Bucket I've heard but never seemed an integral part of the lexicon. If any words should be added I would say "fool," "puto," and "sick" (many Arkansans look at me like "WTF?" when I saw it and that's all to often). Taboo Tongue 00:09, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've heard "bucket" used to mean "beaten-down car" on Pimp My Ride on more than one occasion. So it's definitely used in SoCal. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 04:40, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
As far as I know, I think the word "hella" is on the wane. It was common in the Bay Area back in the late 90s, but I haven't heard it as much since then. "Fool" seems to be common in inner-city speech in both Northern and Southern California, though. --Coolcaesar 08:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
I've never heard the words "hecka" or "hella" uttered by anybody over 6. ςפקιДИτς СФГиганты 03:26, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it is original research, but it's real—I am an oakland native, and I distinctly remember when I first used the word "hecka" at the dinner table in second grade (1983). It got me popped by dad, but it would have been worse had I not used the "censored" version. When I arrived at college in LA, I had a conversation with someone and I used the word "hella." Her response was "you're from seattle???" My girlfriend, an urban seattle native, said that she heard all the time growing up, but rejected it as part of the "california invasion" of her city. I currently work at a jr high in Hayward & still live in the O, and I hear "hella"...well, hella times a day. I always correct the kids (suggesting hecka), but I hear it from the adults as well. Its use is in no way waning. However, it is evidentally not as prevalent in workplaces that only have adults (and Bay immigrants), and many of my peers have said they have had to coach it out of their vocabulary. Its use does, however, cover the urban bay and beyond. As for its lack of use in SoCal, I'm not so sure it's true-- I've heard plenty of use in orange county and certainly where I used to work in south central. Of course, I may have influenced that as well—that word is hella catchy!Reggaedelgado 02:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
From SF here and I still hear "hella" a lot. I hear it a lot from mostly girls (frequently with emphasis in "he-"). I used to use it, but now I don't. I guess the view of whether it's waning or still in use is more about the personal preference of the people you know. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 205.174.22.28 (talk • contribs) 06:04, December 29, 2005 (UTC)

I learned about "hella" right here. Never heard it in actual speech. I have lived in the Sacramento area for the past 20 years; this sounds like a Bay Area thing to me. 24.10.78.185 23:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't write the thing about "hella" users being singled out in So-Cal, and while I believe it's generally true, until we find academic sources to back it up it shouldn't be there, so I'll delete it. If someone finds a source it would be a good addition to the section. Svenska84 01:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Yiddishism

I know New York gets most of the credit for hybridizing Yiddish with English, but has there been any attention paid to the amount of Jews in the SoCal entertainment industry and the influence they might have on TV scripts and the like? jengod 23:38, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Has any research been published on the question? We can't use original research or speculation. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 04:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

My guess is that there is very little direct Yiddish influence on California English ; what Yiddish influence there is comes from Northeastern American English and specifically New York English. While Jews have been present in California since it became a state, the Jews who migrated to Los Angeles in the 20th century - not necessarily due to the entertainment industry, although many did - tended to speak the English of where they came from, generally Northeastern US varieties of English (especially those from the New York and Philadelphia areas, due to the large numbers of Jews there and the US Jewish population historically being concentrated in those cities). The Jewish population of 20th century Los Angeles tended to be natives of the Northeast U.S. (although with a substantial minority coming from the Great Lakes area, and others coming from Europe) or their children, and it was these people who had formerly dominated the entertainment industry and still have some influence. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 4.231.179.82 (talk • contribs) 19:54, December 6, 2005 (UTC)

King/keen

The article says:

Front vowels are raised before velar nasal [ŋ], so that the near-open front unrounded vowel /æ/ and the near-close near-front unrounded vowel /ɪ/ are raised to a close-mid front unrounded vowel [e] and a close front unrounded vowel [i] before[ŋ]. This change makes for minimal pairs such as king and keen, both having the same vowel [i], differing from king [kɪŋ] in other varieties of English.

I'm from SoCal myself, and I can't say I really hear these two sounds merging, although the vowel in "king" definitely does come closer to [i] than it does in other dialects. What I do hear a lot, though, is people pronouncing words like "king" with the vowel having undergone that pre-velar mutation, but then pronouncing the /ŋ/ as [n], so that the only difference between "king", "keen", and "kin" is in the vowel sound (and these three are all distinct). However, I don't believe that anyone I know who does this does it across the board: sometimes it will come out [n] and sometimes [ŋ]. And I don't know if it only affects i/ɪ, or if it affects everything that comes before /ŋ/. Is there some documentation of this phenomenon that's better researched than me listening to my friends talking? -Branddobbe 08:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with that part of the article. I'm a Californian, born and raised, and I do not associate king and keen as being minimal pairs at all. That seems like more of an Massachusetts or (moreso) Southern thing, but not in the least Californian. Where did this come from? I differentiate the vowels i and ɪ completely. I and everyone I know pronounce king [kɪŋ]. --LakeHMM 08:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not a matter of /i/ and /ɪ/ "merging" in any way: there are no minimal pairs of /i/ and /ɪ/ before /ŋ/. It is simply a case of a shift of /ɪ/ to /i/ before /ŋ/. This change is identified by Eckert on her web site as being peculiar to California: "/i/ The vowel in him, sit, and bid is moving in two directions. Before ng, it shifts towards the vowel in beam, bean. Example: think sounds like theenk". I can also vouch for the existence of this shift, as I have the shift, and I was born and raised in San Jose. In my own speech, "king" and "keen" are minimal pairs. It is not because I have merged /i/ and /ɪ/ in any way: it is simply the case that in my internal lexicon, the phonemes of "king" are /kiŋ/, not /kɪŋ/. Same with /æ/ shifting to /e/ before /ŋ/: "bang" and "bane" are minimal pairs for me, their phonemic representation being /beŋ/ and /ben/, respectively. Nohat 08:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I know exactly what you're talking about, but I just don't think it's by any means a trait to Californian English. As I said before, it sounds more southern. --LakeHMM 23:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Just because it's a feature of California English doesn't mean that every single Californian will pronounce it as such. I'm from central California and it's a feature of my speech. I'd also like to note that I didn't even realize there was a difference between my speech in this regard and other dialects until it was pointed out to me. AEuSoes1 03:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Obviously not everyone has to have it, but nobody I know has it, and I don't associate it with a Californian accent at all. --LakeHMM 09:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, Eckert does, and she's a professor of linguistics who has done actual research on the topic. Your anecdotal (lack of) evidence does not provide a very strong counterargument to scholarly research. Nohat 11:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh ouch. --LakeHMM 23:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, as the preface to that section states, those are features which have been identified as being in Californian speech but it does not mean that everyone who speaks English in California has those features, nor are all of those features restricted to California. I personally have the /ɪŋ/ --> [iŋ] (I consider [i] to be a same-morpheme pre-/ŋ/ allophone /ɪ/) raising described by Eckert ("sink" and "seen" have the same vowel as I say them) and hear it commonly in the speech of those around me. I've spent a lot of time (and lived) in both Northern and Southern California, and I've heard this feature from people in both areas. My parents are Bay Area natives and while they don't have it to the extent I do, it is present in their speech. It appears the feature has been spreading in terms of speakers that have it and instances in which it shows up. Svenska84 06:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
What part of California do you live in? AEuSoes1 09:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Los Angeles. --LakeHMM 01:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

My dad's from Iowa and he merges king/keen. I remember once mentioning to him how wierd I found it that Californians merge it (I grew up in CO), and he said something along the lines of "you mean you don't pronounce them with the same vowel?!" I remember another conversation a while later in which I found he merges rain/rang. I don't think this is just a California thing...Linguofreak 23:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's an age thing too? I don't think I do it, I'm in my 30's, but one of my students got confused because I used 'king' for the [I] vowel, and she said, 'but it's keeng!' Lingprof 00:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Northern vs southern

This section really needs some help. There seem to be a lot of people posting their own personal experiences or the difference between themselves and their one friend from the other end of the state. Personally, after 30 years of life in CA, the oonly differences I have heard between my 5 years in LA and 25 in Oakland is "hella" and the "the" before freeways. I'm not sure if SF being called "the city" really merits being in this section, and certainly I've heard about 5000 different ways of saying "u-turn"... and would u-turn really merit it's own discussion? For now, I deleted references to "crazy" because it is not prevalent in southern ca, at least not more prevalent than the rest of the nation. Can we perhaps discuss improving this entire section here instead of editing willy nilly on the main page??Reggaedelgado 21:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The Wikipedia policies of no original research and citing sources apply just as strongly here as anywhere else. If you can't produce published evidence backing up your claims, please don't post them. --Angr (t·c) 21:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree as well. The entire section strikes me as mostly anecdotal accounts of slang rather than any serious linguistical distinctions. I don't know enough about the subject myself, but I would suggest someone either find sources that back up the claims of regional differences in phrases such as "flip a bitch," or just scrap the whole section in its entirety. PenguiN42 22:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that I have lived in northern California my entire life, and I have NEVER heard the phrase "flip a bitch." -- Annonymous Californian.

I haven't either. That section needs to either be backed up with evidence or deleted. Svenska84 06:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Freeway names

Regarding the use of freeway names in the 1970s:

Larry Niven's 1970s short stories used freeway names, instead of numbers. Most of Niven's published short stories are set in Southern California and/or distant time periods. For example, "Cloak of Anarchy" is a short story on pages 111-133 of the Tales of Known Space collection. "Cloak of Anarchy" mentions the San Diego Freeway.

Unfortunately, this is just one citation. While it might be appropriate for a dictionary usage example, I doubt that it demonstrates sufficiently widespread usage to justify the comment in the article.

-- Jasper 08:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

As a Los Angeles native (1950) who moved north 25+ years ago, one of the differences most obvious to me between speech then and speech now is in how people refer to the freeways. In the south part of the state, where freeways are generally named for destinations, the freeway names were generally used then rather than the numbers. When I moved to San Jose, I quickly learned that most people didn't even know the names of the freeways (generally named for people) and referred to them by number only. I'm not sure when usage changed in Southern California, but it's clear that things are different now. Whether it merits inclusion in the article or not, usage has definitely changed over the past 25 years. The most reliable way to check might be going into (way) back issues of the LA Times. 24.10.78.185 23:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that is an accurate description of change that has happened. However, until we find sources to back it up it should probably be deleted, so I will do that. Svenska84 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Freeways have names? -a south bay resident --63.193.241.64 16:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Nasalization patterns in California English

Can anyone provide any insights into the nasalization patterns in California English? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 171.64.133.51 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey - you guys do know that the word "freeway" is native to California too, right? At least thats what I know of. I live on the east coast and I've never heard that word before in my life until I travelled to California on vacation. Everybody else says "highway" or "expressway". The word "freeway" is never used - ever 0% of the time in NY, New England, Maryland, Florida, anywhere in the east. Its so funny for you guys to keep saying how northern californians say freeway and southern californians say freeway, but your both missing the fact that the word freeway is part of your english as well!

You never use the word because you have to pay toll on your equivilant roadways :) --Stacey Doljack Borsody 19:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Ummmm nope. No tolls on the Long Island Expressway. No tolls on any of NY's roads actually. No tolls on I-80 either in NJ. And yes, there are real interstates! Its a west coast thing - trust me! Nobody in the northeast, the south, florida - noobody uses it! People from Cali don't believe me its hilarious! You really think all highways are tolled in NY? Yea right!

That must be fairly recent, when I lived in New York State (1970-77 and again 1992-97) I-90 was a toll road. Angr/talk 17:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I-90 (The New York State Thruway) is still a toll road, as are parts of I-87 in the Albany area. However, it should be noted that the "free" in the word "freeway" doesn't have anything to do with tolls--it refers to the fact that on a freeway, traffic is free-flowing; that is, traffic on the freeway is not impeded by any traffic control devices (such as stop lights or stop signs) and there is no at-grade cross traffic. Both toll roads and nontoll roads can be "freeways". Nohat 02:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

"Drawl" paragraph and Citation issues

Words like "drawl" and "twang" are vague and as such are not accurate enough for an article which aims to seriously describe the linguistic features of a particular speech variety. Because of that, in addition to the fact there is no citation for said claims, I think it's better that particular section get deleted. Svenska84 06:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Go for it! --Angr (tɔk) 07:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Done :) Now I'm busy trying to find sources so we can fill in the remaining citations. One problem is that for the "Influence of California English" section it's not really the domain of scholarly linguistic research to claim any variety is the American "standard." However, sociolinguistically speaking, I have often read in the past about those who perceive Midwestern English to make up the "standard" while others claim California English has largely been filling that role in recent history. Does anyone have any reliable sources which would back up that this debate exists (not that one side is right because it's a fuzzy issue to begin with)? Besides that, the only other remaining missing citation would be the one claiming "For example, according to one former California resident, in the 1970s it was common in Los Angeles to refer to freeways by name instead of by its highway number (i.e., to say "the San Diego Freeway" instead of "the 405" was common in the 1970s)" in the "Northern vs. Southern California" section. While I'm sure this is anecdotally true, this feature does need a citation (and one that's not anecdotal) so I'm wondering what should be done with it Svenska84 08:44, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
What does Geyer 2001 have to say? I haven't seen it. --Angr (tɔk) 08:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I haven't either. If the person who originally put the source in isn't here anymore, I wonder if I can find the article at my college's library. Svenska84 03:20, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the remaining two sections of text which remained uncited in the article. They were actually probably true but until we have academic sources for verification they are best left out. Now that there are no more missing citations it would probably be appropriate to remove it from the list of articles missing citations, right? Svenska84 01:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, it looks like that's done automatically. Never mind. Svenska84 01:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Vowel chart

Assuming that the points in the vowel chart in the "Phonology" section accurately represent the vowels used (at least as accurately as possible with all the variation that can occur), why are ʌ and ɝ used when it looks like ɜ and ɚ, respectively, are closer? Is this for "historical reasons" like what is described in Open-mid back unrounded vowel? Ardric47 03:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Pretty much. It's a convention in English phonology to use the symbol ʌ for the vowel of strut, ɜ for a non-rhotic pronunciation of the vowel of nurse, and to use ɝ and ɚ for the stressed and unstressed versions (respectively) of the rhotic pronunciations of the vowels of nurse and letter. This isn't terribly accurate from a purely phonetic point of view, but it makes comparison with other accents much easier. The values of the IPA vowels characters aren't set in stone anyway; so long as you define how you're using each symbol, and the use is more or less plausible, you have a degree of flexibility. Angr/talk 06:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it makes comparison with other accents easier. Another interesting point is that according to this vowel chart /e/ is higher than /ɪ/ (I believe in many/most dialects /e/ is lower than that, or more specifically, /ɪ/ is higher), but for cross-dialectal comparisons it makes sense to use those to make it clear which classes of words are being referred to ("face" and "kit," respectively). Svenska84 08:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Influence section

I'm going to remove this section in a couple of days if none of the assertions in it can be substantiated by reliable sources. I added a NPOV tag to the section, as well. --AaronS 02:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind the citation requests (except for the one I took out) but I don't think you need to delete the entire section because no one can quickly find sources on a couple of statements that outline different points of view. AEuSoes1 09:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
There's nothing "quick" about it, those statements have been there unsupported by facts for months. The whole section is really nothing more than someone's vague impression that because a lot of movies and TV shows are filmed in California, that means California English is becoming a de-facto standard for American English. That would only be true if (1) the accents people hear in the media have an effect on the accent they used (an idea that's debated by a link in the section), and (2) all Hollywood actors themselves grew up in California and speak California English (they didn't and don't). I wouldn't mind seeing the whole section deleted as unverifiable POV original research. Angr/talk 09:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't recall anyone requesting a factcheck until now. A few days is pretty short notice. We could ask User:Svenska84 if he has a source since he's the one who put it in there. How about it, Kirk? AEuSoes1 09:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
If the assertions are in any way verifiable by reliable sources, a couple of days should be plenty of time. Angr is right, the section seems to have been there for a while, and the whole thing can be deleted, because all of it is built from a few dubious and unsupported assumptions. --AaronS 13:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
See this article [1] regarding the dominance of TV in Hollywood because all the movie studios are outsourcing production to Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. --Coolcaesar 17:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

That's an interesting article. But, the discussion is really rather irrelevant, since the "influence" section assumes that California English is being exported through TV, movies, and radio. We all know that only a fraction of the television shows and movies filmed in California are actually set in California. Unless there is some scholarly or reliable source that can back up all of the strange and, in my opinion, unverifiable assumptions in this section, I think that it should be removed entirely. It serves no purpose other than pure fanboy cruft. --AaronS 18:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the section. Please don't put it back unless you have reliable sources to back up the seemingly POV assumptions made there. --AaronS 17:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I guess I could add that p.133–134 of How We Talk: American Regional English Today by Allan Metcalf (ISBN 0618043624) say:
But California has place of pride among dialects of the West because it has a microphone. California language is amplified across the whole country, including the rest of the West, thanks to the nerve center of American entertainment in souther California. On the television, in the movies, and in popular music we hear the real and simulated accents of California kids, cops, cranks, comics, crusaders, and just plain citizens.... the California word is broadcast to America and the world.
...For the most part, nowadays as in the past, California English sounds unaccented to most Americans
...The influence of the California accent on the rest of American English is therefore largely unnoticed. California media simply reinforce our sense that the state's language is "normal."
Now, of course this is all highly unscientific as far as I can tell, but it is the opinion of an author who has published a book on American dialects. Nohat 17:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
In the domain of sociolinguistics and what's considered "neutral" or not, things get really fuzzy because what someone considers "neutral" is inherently subjective. My text in the original section intended to address that issue, although I think some people misinterpreted it to mean that the article felt that California English somehow defined some norm or "accentless" English (which is not what I intended people to get out of that section). I attempted to convey the notion that what's "neutral" is subjective and while some might claim the English spoken in California is "neutral," others might strongly disagree. However, it is worth citing what those such as Metcalf have noted, purely for their sociolinguistic value (scholarly observations of sociolinguistic perceptions are entirely valid and say nothing of someone's POV on the matter). I don't think it's a POV problem to state that opinions differ as to what's "neutral" or "accentless" as long as the article doesn't side with one or the other. From what I originally wrote I thought it would be clear the article was not claiming such a position on either side but simply pointing to the existence of different sociolinguistic viewpoints. One thing is certain--this is no "fanboy fluff" but a worthy and academically valid topic to pursue. I think that a section addressing the media in relation to the variety/varieties of a language spoken in a state with particularly noteworthy media concentration is desirable. Maybe we can reword it and make sure it sounds clear to everyone that no POV is being taken, and cite those such as Metcalf (and ideally others, as well) in pointing out differing views and observations from linguists. I would hope everyone would keep in mind that simply by stating the existence of differing views there should be no POV problems (which is why I'm frankly surprised some would interpret what I wrote as "fanboy fluff" when none of the rest of the article took on such an undesirable and academically inaccurate bias). Svenska84 01:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Weird sound change

Two of my friends from California insert an /l/ into the word "both." (thus "bolth"). Has anyone heard of this? Does anybody know what causes it? (I assume that it must be an assimilation of the off-glide on the o to the /þ/, or something like that.) Also, is there any information on Western US dialects other than Californian? If so could an article be written up on them? There are several features of my Denverese that I'd like to compare to some hard data to see if they're actual Coloradan or whether I'm just crazy. Linguofreak 06:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what causes it, but I can add that I say it too (I'm from SoCal). I also do the same thing in "oatmeal" ("oltmeal"), but I think that if I didn't eat (and thus say) oatmeal as much as I do, I probably wouldn't have that. I think I have a tendency to do it in "remo(l)te control", but that's most likely due to the influence of "control". -Branddobbe 08:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I typically have /l/ in "both" as well, though I'm not sure this is specific to California. I don't appear to have "intrusive l" in any other positions. Svenska84 09:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
And apparently some of my friends from other areas have it too. Illinois and Minnesota, if I recall their states of origin correctly. Linguofreak 02:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Illinois has some of this, I've noticed it in a couple of people. However, one of them has a father from california so that may be the cause. -Kode 23:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
That's interesting. I wonder if there is any linguistic research out there concerning "bolth"--it seems to be pretty common here and is pretty much my default pronunciation of the word. In fact, for a language forum I frequent I made an audio recording in response to another participant's audio post and I didn't realize it at the time I was recording it but when I played it over I definitely heard myself saying "bolth." If anyone's curious here's the recording [2]. If you listen in just a little bit before halfway through the recording I say "both" with what sounds to me like "bolth" now when I listen to it over again (tell me if you think it's something different). As far as I can tell I have no "intrusive l" anywhere else, even in the same environment (like "oath"), but of course "both" is a high frequency word whereas something like "oath" isn't. Svenska84 05:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I heard Richard Roeper say it on a recent episode of Ebert & Roeper at the Movies. Interestingly, a Google search for "bolth" shows a lot of hits of people using that spelling both self-consciously and un–self-consciously. Here is a couple LINGUIST list postings that mention it: [3] [4]. Nohat 09:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

The origin of "bolth" remains a mystery. It sporadically occurs throughout the United States and has been noted to occur sporadically in California, Illinois, Michigan, and New Jeresey.

hella

  • I live in Southern California and I hear this phrase a lot. I think it's worth noting that the song "Hella Good" is performed by a Southern Californian band. Also, regarding "a grip of", I heard this term a lot in high school, but I graduated in 1996 and I rarely hear this term anymore. Danny Lilithborne 03:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Incidentally, as a Northern Californian who's now gone to college for several years in Southern California, it should be noted that I hear "hella" more down here than I did back in Santa Cruz (where the phrase was frequently self-consciously not used, as many people thought its use marked one as being from "over the hill" (i.e. the San Jose area)). Meanwhile, I have never before heard "grippa" or "a grip of", ever, except in this article.

Coupla more words

Just thought I'd throw out a few more differences in pronunciation, although they may just be more prevalent in NorCal English. (My wife's family is from NY and they've pointed these out -- repeatedly...). - milk pronounced as "melk" - were pronounced as "war" - man pronounced as "mon," especially when used in place of dude or brah -- although that may just be an ironic fakey-jamaikey accent....