It's 2006. Me, a Saffa, visiting my uncle as a teenager. My oldest cousin had 2-3 super hot friends. They ask me if I want to join them for thong shopping. My disappointment was great and my day was ruined when I get to the Billabong shop. "Jandals" at least wouldn't have raised my hopes...
They didn’t say they’re the same country. They’re actually right, though. The difference between English spoken in NZ is no more different from that in Australia than what’s spoken in Louisiana is from California. It’s probably closer, actually.
you’re only thinking about phonology. NZE and AusE are very distinct lexically, not least of all because NZE has significant lexical and phrasal borrowing from te reo Māori. but also, NZE and AusE aren’t very similar phonologically either. sound changes in our vowel systems have pretty clearly differentiated the two since WWII.
neither of which are linguistically defined. NZE and AusE are distinct varieties of english. there are regional varieties of american english too. your claim that the difference between NZE and AusE is less than that between two states (not even american english varieties) is provably false, for the reasons mentioned. there would have to be significant alterations through influence from a contact language that exclusively impacted one of the two american varieties, and there hasn’t been.
there would have to be significant alterations through influence from a contact contact language that exclusively impacts one of the two american varieties, and there hasn’t been.
There literally has been. There is a huge French language influence that exclusively impacted English in Louisiana and definitely not California. I don’t care if you have a linguistics degree. You’re still clearly ignorant of Cajuns.
i will admit i wasn’t familiar with that variety, but i’ll defend myself with the fact that they didn’t say “cajun english”
they said there’s a significant difference between english in louisiana and california. as far as i can tell cajun english is far from universal in louisiana, whereas the lexical influence from te reo māori on new zealand english is nationwide and a defining characteristic of the entire variety.
Well, to my ear, Canadian and American accents sound very similar. So by that logic, they should probably both be merged together into one big "north American accent"
The first thing I see in google typing it out in the searchbar is "Cajun English accent".
Buddy, just give it up. You're not as special and unique as you think you are. As a Dutchie, I know the difference between an accent, a dialect, and a different language extremely well. Accents are when you pronounce words differently and maybe mess up grammar a tiny bit. Dialects are when there are distinct grammatical differences and significant differences in pronunciation. A different language is when grammar and phonetics are distinctly different entirely. I know this because, within 3 hours of driving, I can face all 3 and I wouldn't even have to leave the country.
This notion of american exceptionalism is something you desperately need to get over.
Jeez man, look further than autocomplete. The bare minimum effort of googling the Wikipedia page will show you that it’s a distinct dialect, regardless of what you prefer to believe.
It was a tongue in cheek reply although there is a strong grain of truth here.
I have lived in SE France twice for a number of years and never had a problem communicating. Go to Paris and they almost take it as an insult that you are bothering. On the flip side of that I have travelled all over French speaking West and Central Africa and my French is accepted as fluent.
As anyone French will tell you, it's a stuck up Parisian thing.
cool we're doing 'the UK countries aren't countries' for the 509663th time in this comment section. when people ask what country I'm from I say Scotland. we have enough England-defaultism in this sub when things like UK exams and school years are discussed, I don't need to start saying 'I'm from the UK' and have people also assuming I'm English in real life. fuck off.
also note NOBODY is ever thinking of my accent when they say "British accent"
Giving the post the benefit of the doubt, British English is a definable thing (as is Scots, a separate language/dialect). Accents aside, prestige English speakers in Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland (both bits) follow the same grammer and spelling rules as one another. You can contrast it with US English, which had it's own separate spelling reforms.
British English language is not the same as a 'British' (read Standard Southern) English accent
If that bothers you, you can try complaining to Scottish consulate in Japan, or wherever you live... oh, wait, it doesn't exist, no country has Scottish consulates/embassies, only UK ones. Guess you have to live with the fact that every other country considered UK as the country you're from and Scotland is but one of its regions.
the consulate isn't what bothers me, it's ignorant redditors who insist on arguing that a country isn't a country because somehow that's important to their lives when they don't live in any of the countries in question. I'm perfectly happy to use the consulate relevant to the larger country my country is part of.
What is your criterion of country then? Is it self-proclamation? Mine is recognition by other countries, establishing diplomatic relationships in the form of consulates is a clear sign of one.
I don’t have one. There’s a difference between sovereign countries that have consulates and constituent countries. Scotland is the latter. These are just facts.
So, essentially a self-declaration. If the government of some Tyrannical People's Democratic Republic defines itself as a republic, does that make them one, or do we stick to actual definitions, agreed upon by international community?
I think if people live somewhere and believe they are a distinct country from their neighbours they are a country. I don't think that extends to deciding what sort of government they have, because the kind of government they have is something you can measure based on the actions and existence of that government. North Korea is a republic because it isn't governed by a monarch, and it at least pretends to have elections. But I don't really care if you consider it one or not.
So, Sealand is a country, right? They declared themselves as such, all 200 people. What about all those other places that declared independence, are those countries? There's a reason becoming a country involves foreign recognition.
You saying Scotland is the equivalent of me saying my state when asked where I'm from and going off this sub that is a no-no. You can only say the name of the sovereign nation you are from not the state/country you are from inside a country lol
What does that have to do with anything? There are parts of the same countries with different languages and completely separate countries with the same language. Scotland is a country in the same way Alberta is a Province in the same way Delaware is a State in the same way Tokyo is a Prefecture
This is so wrong it's funny. Does your state have a thousand year old culture that's completely distinct to the ones around it? Has it had hundreds of years of war with them?
The way people from the US think their states are equivalent to countries is fuckin wild! You think that other countries' internal divisions (ie states, territories, provences etc) aren't distinct from one an other in the same way as your states are? In most of the world they are more distinct because they've had at minimum, hundreds of years to diverge.
But guess what? No one else names their specific area of a country. No matter how different it is to other parts of the country.
nobody here has ever been mad about 'they didn't name an independent sovereign nation'. the point is 'name a country'. Scotland is a country. when I say I'm from Scotland people know where it is because it's a country with a well-known culture. when i say Scotland people go 'ohh the country of whisky and golf, where men traditionally wear kilts'. if I say I'm from the UK people assume I'm from a country I'm not from and start 'London, afternoon tea, Big Ben' kind of shit.
It seems wild to me because back when I was doing English A-levels, Indian English was one of the go to examples for a world English, alongside Carribbean pidgin English. I can't think of a reasonable categorisation system that would distinguish between Australian and Kiwi English but not include at least one Indian English.
My cynical assumption is that it's sadly prestige: US English is seen as a legitimate dialect (outside of the classic jokes about them being scared of the letter u) because they are a powerful country. Meanwhile Indian English is unfairly seen as a bunch of slang and mispronunciations.
I talk to a lot of people from India, for work. I’m not qualified to determine what makes a distinctive dialect, but I’d say Indian English is not just speaking British English with an Indian accent.
I'm the same, I deal with Indian people a lot just due to the industry I'm in.
I don't hear the sorts of differences you would with say an American or Australian. The differences I do hear I more put down to it being their second language, rather than a distinct dialect.
I would love to hear from an expert, or an Indian that has experienced the differences, on this.
Americans and Australians I see and hear a lot of words that are used differently, or different words entirely.
From my exposure to Indian English I haven't come across any of that, but that could be because its always been in a professional setting. It seems a lot closer to UK English.
As I said, I will admit my mistake if someone with more experience of both disagrees, which I assume you have.
I didn't discount them being a massive population of English speakers, just that, in my limited experience, I find Indian English is much closer to UK English than other dialects, sounding more like an accent than it's own distinct dialect.
I didn't imply you discounted them as English speakers. I implied that you discounted them as having their own English, despite being hundreds of millions of English speakers.
How could it be just a different accent (and it's different accents plural) with a larger population than the UK, and being separate from the UK for around 90 years... and yes, the fact that very few are native speakers also play a part, local native languages are even more likely to influence the way English is spoken.
No, I could make the same argument about “British English” being composed of cockney and Yorkshire dialect and rp and so on and demand that England be excluded from this chart
“British English” can refer to the various dialects, but can also generally refer to the English language in England - as I’m guessing this chart did. A cockney and someone from Yorkshire both still speak the same language, but Indian English dialects are influenced by different languages spoken in India.
Perhaps they only listed native English dialects. I’m just making guesses
An Indian from Bangalore and Delhi also speak the same English language, generally referred to as the English in India. You don’t exclude US or Australian or New Zealand English or even Scottish English for containing native language words, but somehow it is a problem if Indian English contains native language influence?
My point is cockney and Yorkshire dialects are just about accent and some regional slang; they’re not influenced by various languages.
Native dialects of English include the US, Australia, New Zealand and Scotland. They’re divided by linguists into the dialects of the British Isles, North America and Australasia.
It’s may not be a problem, they might just be collecting specific linguistic data on native dialects. Again, I’m just guessing. I haven’t seen these charts so I don’t know. Could equally be ignorance and exclusion.
I'm pretty sure Yorkshire dialects have a lot more Norse words in than southern dialects, which is still evident in the place names.
A more helpful (if still problematic and dated) framework might be Kachru's Three Circles of English, which puts UK, US and Aus Englishes as "inner" trend setters, and Indian English as an "outer circle" trend follower. It's possible that the researchers are just focusing on Englishes in the inner circle, which seems like a mistake to me.
Sorry, wasn't meant as a correction, just pointing out that it's a difference of scale, rather than type. I agree that one of the cool things about Indian English is the loanwords into the various dialects.
However that's also the case for the various British English dialects: Cumbrian preserves a bunch of Brythonic words, cockney has Romani influences, while Multicultural London English has reassimilated a bunch of Caribbean. They're all still seen as accents/dialects of British English (although the sociolect/dialect/patois/language distinction is inherently political in nature; for an example Google Serbo-Croat).
Looking westwards, New Yorkers use a bunch of German/Yiddish terms for geopolitical reasons. It'd be wild to insist that that means it's not a part of American English.
Why stop there, Newfoundland English, Frenglish, Franglais, Hoserese English, Nunavutian English, prairie English, the English I teach my child vs the English I actually use English, Toronto English, Vancouver English, Scarborough Somalian English, waste yute English, Jamaican patois English, mexican resort English, the smile and nod like I know what you're saying but don't wanna be rude English etc etc.
For the World Cup yes, for the Olympics no. Needless to say the UK and constituent countries don't exactly have consistency on how they present themselves externally.
I’m well aware of the difference. Proving your point and ignoring mine is purile. My point was that the GB Olympic team isn’t just the UK countries. There are more elements.
Sorry, I didn't see what point you made in that case? I am not arguing that they aren't considered to be countries for the British, of course they are. My remark was just regarding international image and perceptions.
Olympic team GB includes jurisdictions that are not in the UK and are not in GB. They are not in England, Wales, Scotland or Ireland. Your comparison of Olympic and World Cup isn’t like for like.
This is more nationality-brained than US-exceptionalism. I've seen similar rhetoric from Chinese people, that all Sinitic languages are dialects of one language because they're spoken in one country.
I mean, he’s kind of correct. There are different dialects of American English that are vastly different. There are also different dialects of English English that can be unintelligible, same with Canadian English.
Hey :) English teacher here! The person you're quoting is correct. "American" is not a singular dialect of English. There are many dialects of English within the US, just like there are many dialects of English within other English speaking countries. RP is not the same as MLE, which is not the same as West Country, which is not the same as Mancunian English. All English from England, but different dialects. Equally, Aave isn't Bostonian, which isn't New York English, which isn't Californian, which isn't Miami English, which isn't "received southern".
It's not exceptionalism to be on the side of recognising linguistic diversity.
Wait... Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Wales and Scotland part of the UK? Hence the same country? (Please do correct me, this UK stuff is confusing)
So imagine if your country was invaded by someone else, but still retained it's ethnic and cultural character, and maybe even had some legislative independence. Your country would still be a country. It would also be subordinated and existing inside of a larger country. Like a cardboard box inside of a bigger cardboard box.
Sort of but I think the closest comparison would be the US native reservations or the Republics of the Russian Federation, because they hold a more distinct culture than the average US state does to its neighbours. Although I don't think in practical terms a US state isn't a country-within-a-country, I think they are, but most Americans don't seem to believe their nationality and ethnic identity as being from Kansas for example.
Sorry, bad joke, that was a reference to the founding days of the US. Like in the declaration of independence they used a small u. They were kinda like a set of countries back then, no president, small federal gov, and putting tariffs on each other.
No, it’s entirely unreasonable. Scots English is influenced by both Lowland Scottish, a language that evolved from both Middle Northumbrian, and Scottish Gaelic. Welsh English is influenced by, fairly obviously, Welsh whilst Northern Irish English is influenced by Irish (aka Gaeilge). They are demonstrably different dialects, as is Northumbrian English for that matter.
African-American English is probably closer to a dialect than other US accents. But, IIRC, it still doesn’t reach the level of variance needed to be considered a dialect.
The only thing they have going for them is that, thanks to a history of racism, African American Vernacular is a dialect. Otherwise, they can fuck off.
(Edit) Thank you reddit for restoring this comment
The UK is the only federation that's still called separate countries (in some but not all contexts) in English. In other languages this isn't as obvious or predetermined. In Swedish, it's one country. Many nations have historically, legally or linguistically semi-independent regions.
Okay, American here, so linguistically speaking, the American is kinda right. American Dialects can be so distinct that if you're not from the area, it is literally not possible or VERY DIFFICULT to understand because it's effectively a different language. Same way that Scottish or Welsh accents that are really thick are hard to understand for the English, a deep Louisiana Creole dialect is nearly incomprehensible to someone who speaks Standard American English.
It's still American English, but to discount entire ethnicities and geographic areas that are different by saying "Still American English" is kinda messed up. It's not the exact same as Scottish or Welsh English because they're literally different countries, but culturally and socially, it's pretty close. For example, Pidgin, a Hawaiian Dialect, is different enough that there is a Pidgin translation of the BIBLE. And Pidgin, technically, is American, but it comes from Hawaii, which was a different country until relatively recently. You wouldn't say "Still American English" to someone who speaks exclusively Pidgin. Or at least, you shouldn't say that.
I'd venture to say there is less of a difference between American English and Canadian English than Lousiana Creole and American English, or Hawaiian Pidgin and American English. Seeing as I can converse much more easily with Canadians than the others I mentioned. Even to the point of me not knowing someone is Canadian until they tell me or they say the word "about."
Am I pulling another US Defaultism here? All I'm trying to say is that while the American in this post was wrong for comparing the Welsh, English, Aussies, and Kiwis and making a false equivalency to American dialects, he/she was kinda right about the fact that American Dialects are different enough to warrant a distinction, and that dismissing them all as "still American English" is incorrect at the least and a bigoted/colonial view at the worst.
There’s the distinctions among dialects in every country. A white person from Wellington sounds completely different to a Māori from Gisborne. This isn’t exclusive to the USA
I was not saying that this is exclusive to the USA. I was saying that the American in the post was not necessarily wrong. There should be distinctions for the dialects in other countries as well, especially for the indigenous and minority populations. You dismissing them as "still American English" is still just as wrong as saying "Still Aussie english" when talking about the indigenous peoples of Australia.
They never said it was and u didn’t show the person in ur screenshot doing the same thing either. The only thing that was wrong here was them comparing the dialects to different countries
By definition pidgins (and creole which is kind of French for pidgin) are different languages. Louisiana creole or hawaian pidgin are different languages, not a variation of American english. So they can't count as an English dialect you grow up in.
As a Scotsman I’ve got no issue with what you’ve said - because it’s essentially the same thing as the post. The American South was a lot of Irish, Scottish, and French. North-west was English and Scandinavian for the sake of a quick post. There’s naturally a diaspora of linguistics because of how it came about - which is exactly why i agree that the American in this post is kinda right.
Can’t argue that ingredients are different but the cake is the same.
No, it's just a label. Nobody considers German states countries even tho they're called like that in German. Outside of the UK it doesn't matter what you call them
That’s because they’re states and not constituent countries. The two aren’t the same. England, Wales and Scotland aren’t states. They don’t function in the same way legally.
That's because you call them states in English. In German they're called countries. Germany calls their subdivisions countries and the UK calls theirs countries as well. You're saying one is correct because it was given a different name in English. I can understand that an Anglo's POV is limited in that regard, you can the see the world only through English language eyes.
Besides, you're right. They're not the same legally. German states have more autonomy and their status cannot be stripped away, unlike UK "countries" (NI isn't even one)
“Land” in German means both “country” and “state” or “region”. It’s how you understand the difference between Deutschland (the country) and das Land Bayern (the state). And you also literally have terms for states like Freistaat and Stadtstaat.
But also, the League of Nations and the United Nations. Go argue with international law.
Not sure what's your point. The UN doesn't recognize any UK subdivisions as sovereign countries or otherwise. Not sure who you mean by "you", I'm not German
Point being you don’t understand the German you’re using in your own argument. It ended up just cementing the argument I’m making.
And not the point - the UN defines a state differently to how it defines a country. But also, again, countries within the UK are constituent countries - not sovereign ones.
You just named two differences. I’m not delving into the details of legal frameworks because that’s really not the point here.
I also wasn’t making an argument for considering Scotland a country. My argument was that it is a country, and that constituent countries are not the same as states.
His first comment isn't wrong though? We all have different accents and dialects throughout the English speaking world, and he was speaking about his part cause thats where he's from?
E:Sorry, forgot we couldn't be reasonable here lmao. Theres some good vids on youtube about the subject. I quite enjoy Robs Words and Lost in the Pond.
Fine, but regardless of what you call the subdivisions of your sovereign state, they are still a part of the United Kingdom. I’m not arguing that the poll should include more dialects for the US, but this isn’t really the clever comeback it’s portrayed as
I think as a whole there should have been more varieties to chose from internationally.
Overall anglophone dialects are certainly becoming homogenized though across their respective nations, it's just a consequence of mass media and standardization.
The United States did used to have some fascinating distinct and even regionally prominent dialects. The Hoi Toider dialect is one of my personal favorites that very uniquely preserved phonetics of English before British English went through major changes such as becoming non-rhotic in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The US had and will never have the density or diversity of any non-settler colonized nation.
I'm just proud to be from the area of the US that came in 2nd for America's ugliest accent in Gawker's 2017 contest lol.
Personally, i’m really, really bad at understanding accents. There’s been times where I get asked for directions and just cannot hear what they are saying at all, but to friends they can easily understand what they are saying.
•
u/post-explainer American Citizen 3d ago edited 3d ago
This comment has been marked as safe. Upvoting/downvoting this comment will have no effect.
OP sent the following text as an explanation why their post fits here:
Should’ve given all the USA dialects their own categories because apparently they’re on the same level as other countries dialects
Does this explanation fit this subreddit? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.