please bear in mind that i am no expert in linguistics, on the English language(s), or even in American history. I have always heard, however, that English-speaking settlers arrived in Virginia (if we forget about Roanoke Island) many years before they landed at Plymouth Rock. I have also been told that the English spoken in the Tidewater region of Virginia and North Carolina is closer or closest to Elisabethan English..... Correct me if i am mistaken.
respectfully, Mario
Dr. Mario D. Fenyo
University Professor of American History
Department of History and Government
Bowie State University
Bowie, MD 20715
USA
________________________________
From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com on behalf of Anunoby, Ogugua
Sent: Wed 4/27/2011 1:54 PM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Is American English Bastardized (British) En...
The original home of the English language is England. The language was transported to the US by English speaking English men and women who settled in the North East corner of what is now part of the US. These settlers called their new home "New England". They understandably brought their language with them.
The English language is a "living" language in the sense that it is an evolving, geographically active medium of oral and written communication as Latin for example is not today. What is also true is that there are variants of most living languages as is the case with the Arabic, Dutch, Portuguese, and Spanish languages for example. When this is the case, there is some agreement among "experts" that there is a classic form of the language. What one might say therefore is that while the American form of the English language may not be said to be the classic form of the English language, it is generally intelligible to most English language speakers regardless of where they come from or learned their English.
BBC English is considered by most "experts" outside the US and some "experts" in the US to be the classic form of the English language. I am told by my Arab friends that classic Arabic is the Arabic of the Holy Koran which by the way is the Arabic that is Mecca form of the Arabic language. Classic Spanish I am told, is the Spanish of the Castile region of Spain. Is that to say the Mexican Spanish is bastardized? I would not go that far.
Is American English a bastardized form of the English language? I would not say that it is just as I would not say that the English language of Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are bastardized. English language speakers from any of the above countries will generally understand each other's spoken and written English. These English speakers may not understand the pigeon or broken English spoken in English speaking West African countries for example. If therefore there is a bastardized form of the language, pigeon or broken English would be a serious candidate for that depiction.
I might add that the English language learned by non-native English language learners outside Great Britain and the US is most usually BBC English. This it may be argued suggests that US English is not considered by these learners of the English language as classic English.
oa
From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Farooq A. Kperogi
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:14 AM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Is American English Bastardized (British) En...
Chief Kwabby,
Thanks for your thoughtful intervention. Actually, my central thesis in that essay is that there is no authentic, pristine English and that all English, to the extent that it's always been a mishmash of several languages, is "bastardized." But I also pointed out that many idiosyncratic phonological and syntactical features of American English are more proximate to the "proto-language" than contemporary British English if we hold up the most socially prestigious variant of early modern English as the reference point for "authenticity."
Your two questions are not mutually exclusive; they are, in fact, mutually reinforcing. This is what I mean: My argument is that American English's relentless borrowing from several languages shows fidelity to the "bastard" heritage of the English language. So my answer to your first question is "yes." You asked how American English's extensive borrowing from other languages is different from Old English's linguistic alchemy. Well, it's not different. That's why I noted in the article that, "the most important reason why American English is not a bastardization of the 'authentic' English, ironically, is that only the American variety of the English language is continuing with English's germinal 'bastard' heritage." In other words, lexical purism has always been alien to the English language and American English, in more ways than the more conservative contemporary "standard" British English, is spurning purism by borrowing extensively from other languages.
Yes, you're right that it should be "bastardized," not "bastardize." That's actually how it appeared on my blog--and in the newspaper where it was first published--but in copying and pasting the article to my email I missed the "d."
Farooq
1 Park Place South
Suite 817C
Atlanta, GA, USA.
30303
Cell: (+1) 404-573-9697
Blog: www.farooqkperogi.blogspot.com <http://www.farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/>
"The nice thing about pessimism is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised." G. F. Will
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:23 PM, <KwabbyG@aol.com> wrote:
Farooq,
Great article, as usual! While you manage to put together, impressively, a number of examples to show that the British variant of the English Language is more "bastardized" than its American cousin (I prefer offspring), you do not seem, yourself, to be wholly convinced by the central theme of your argument.
Towards the conclusion of your article, you wrote the following:
In more ways than any other variety, it is pushing the semantic and lexical frontiers of the language and enriching it in the process. Many international borrowings into the English language now come by way of American English, precisely because America is the world's most racially and culturally diverse country (emphasis mine).
Are you by the above not suggesting that since "America is the world's most racially and culturally diverse country" it is "pushing the semantic and lexical frontiers of the language and enriching it in the process" by allowing its variant of the English Language to be influenced by its more diverse racial composition?
If yes, how is this development process different from earlier ones where British English, to further quote you, "sprang forth from the linguistic alchemy of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Celts"?
If no, are you then suggesting that influence of American English when it has come into contact with other racial or national identities has been a one-way street? I doubt that very much since that is not what your other articles ("The African Origins of Common English Words <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/09/african-origins-of-common-english-words.html> " comes to mind) have suggested.
On a minor note, your concluding statement read "All English is bastardize" (emphasis mine). Obviously a typographical error, you will agree with me that the verb should have been in the past tense (as in bastardized).
Many thanks for your illuminating articles!
Kwabby
In a message dated 4/22/2011 4:24:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, farooqkperogi@gmail.com writes:
Is American English Bastardized (British) English? <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-american-english-bastardized-english.html>
By Farooq A. Kperogi
Like other Nigerians, I was educated in British English-and taught to disdain American English as inauthentic, debased form of (British) English. But is there any truth to this notion? The straightforward answer is no. As a matter of fact, in spite of appearances to the contrary, American English actually precedes contemporary British English. In other words, contemporary British English is worthier to be labeled "bastardized" English than American English is, as I will show shortly.
But, first, although Brits (and heirs of their linguistic tradition, like Nigerians) cherish the thought that they are the custodians of the "original" English tongue, the idea that there is such a thing as "original" English as opposed to "bastardized" English is itself ahistorical at best and ignorant at worst. English, as most people know, has always been a mélange of several languages. In other words, it has been a lingual "bastard" from its very nascence.
The English language came forth when a vast multitude of West Germanic warriors called Angles invaded what is today Britain in the 5th century. The Angles conquered and later commixed with an autochthonous population known as Celts. Much later, other Germanic people, notably the Saxons and the Jutes, joined the Angles to further overwhelm the Celts. One of the consequences of these invasions and resettlements was that a language (which linguistic historians now call Old English) was born. It sprang forth from the linguistic alchemy of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Celts. In this fusion, according to linguists, the Saxon dialect dominated and the indigenous Celtic language was marginalized <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/page/thehistoryofenglish/the-history-of-english> . (The Celtic language, more popularly called Gaelic, has survived in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Irish Republic with dialectal variations).
Two centuries later, another horde of northern Germanic warriors invaded what had by then become known as the Land of the Angles (which was later shortened to England) and brought to bear their own dialect in the lexis and structure of the emergent language. In the 11th century, people from northern France, called the Normans, invaded England, overthrew its Anglo-Saxon ruling class, and imposed French (or what some people call Anglo-Norman French) as the official language for over 300 years. This historical fact radically altered the structure and vocabulary of English.
In the eighteenth century, the English (by now an ethnic and linguistic synthesis of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Celts, the French, etc) embarked on imperial conquests in Asia, Africa, and the Americas and found themselves borrowing words extensively into their language from the several languages they encountered.
Numerous other influences were brought to bear on the language. For instance, many of the vocabularies we use in astronomy (nadir, summit, acme, etc), mathematics (algebra, etc), and other sciences are derived from Arabic. The modern vocabulary of scholarship and learning is almost entirely Latinate. And several common words we use in modern conversational English are borrowed from other languages.
According to one study, 29 percent of the vocabulary of modern English is derived from Latin. Another 29 percent is derived from French. Germanic languages (that is, the "original" tongue) account for only 26 percent. And 16 percent of English vocabulary is derived from a hotchpotch of other languages, notably Greek, Arabic, Hindi, Spanish, Italian, the Scandinavian languages, Hebrew, Yiddish, etc. (For the contribution of African languages to the modern vocabulary of the English language, see my previous article titled, "The African Origins of Common English Words" <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/09/african-origins-of-common-english-words.html> ).
Now, a language that has borrowed this expansively from other languages (which has made the English language the most ecumenical language in the world) can't legitimately lay claim to linguistic purity, although there are several misguided movements for Anglo-Saxon linguistic purism in Britain now.
But let us, for the sake of argument, agree that there was indeed such a thing as the pure, pristine English language before its latter-day contamination by "horrible Americanisms" and by what George Orwell once called "exaggerated Latinisms." Let us periodize this "pure" English from the mid 1550s to the early 1600s when what is called "modern English," that is, the version of English we broadly speak today, emerged. This was the period during which the works of William Shakespeare, unarguably the greatest writer in the English language, appeared. It was also the time that the King James Bible, one of the most decisive influences in the current form and idiomatic universe of the English language, was published. This book's supreme significance to the development and standardization of the English language is evidenced in the fact that it has contributed up to 257 idioms to the English language. No other single source rivals that feat. Not even Shakespeare's prolific oeuvre.
Well, according to many linguistic historians, many of the distinctive features that differentiate American English from British English actually date back to early modern English. In their immensely influential book, American English: Dialects and Variation <http://www.amazon.com/American-English-Dialects-Variation-Language/dp/0631204873> , Walt Wolfram and Natalie Shilling-Estes point out that, "Contrary to popular perceptions, the speech of the Jamestown colonists [i.e., the first English settlers in America in 1607] more closely resembled today's American English than today's standard British speech, since British English has undergone a number of innovations which did not spread to once remote America" (pg. 93).
For instance, during Shakespeare's time, the most socially prestigious English speech had a rhotic accent. That is, speakers pronounced the letter "r" wherever it appeared in a word-like Americans do now. But contemporary British Received Pronunciation is now non-rhotic. Is that a "bastardization" of the language?
Similarly, many words and usage patterns that are now regarded as peculiarly American have actually been preserved from early modern English. A few examples will suffice: the American usage of the word "mad" to mean angry is faithful to how it was used in Shakespearean times. In contemporary British English, however, the word now chiefly means insane, mentally unhinged. That's a British "bastardization."
And "fall," the American English word for the season when leaves fall from trees after the summer season, is more "authentic" than the British English "autumn." In southeastern England, the cultural pacesetter of England from where the Jamestown colonists hailed, "fall" was the preferred term.
Many idiosyncratic syntactic structures in American English that contemporary British English speakers deride are also derived from early modern, Shakespearean English. For instance, such American past participles as "gotten" (as in: I have gotten my share of his troubles; British English: got), "proven" (as in: He has proven to be right; British English: proved), etc are preserved from the "original." Similarly, in Shakespearean times "don't" used to be the contraction of "does not," NOT "do not." This practice stopped only in the early 20th century. This sense is preserved, interestingly, in African-American vernacular speech (now fashionably called Ebonics) and in informal southern U.S English generally. When I first heard Michael Jackson sing, "it don't matter if you're black or white" in high school, it grated on my grammatical nerves, but that's how people who spoke early modern English would have said it.
But the most important reason why American English is not a bastardization of the "authentic" English, ironically, is that only the American variety of the English language is continuing with English's germinal "bastard" heritage. In more ways than any other variety, it is pushing the semantic and lexical frontiers of the language and enriching it in the process. Many international borrowings into the English language now come by way of American English, precisely because America is the world's most racially and culturally diverse country.
Think about this: Can contemporary British speakers of the language-or any other speakers of the language for that matter- imagine speaking their language without these words: "OK," "movie," "radio," "teenager," "immigrant," etc? Well, those words are distinctively American and were once derided as "horrible Americanisms" by supercilious Britishers.
After all is said and done, linguistic nativism is a treacherous betrayal of the intrinsic hybridity of the English tongue. No variety of the language is authentic. All English is bastardize
Related Articles:
1. A Comparison of Nigerian, American and British English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2007/09/divided-by-common-language-comparing.html>
2. <http://www.blogger.com/goog_2036618659> Why is "Sentiment" Such a Bad Word in Nigeria? <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2009/12/why-is-sentiment-such-bad-word-in.html>
3. Ambassador Aminchi's Impossible Grammatical Logic <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2009/12/yaraduas-health-amb-aminchis-impossible.html>
4. 10 Most Annoying Nigerian Media English Expressions <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2009/12/10-most-annoying-nigerian-media-english.html>
5. Sambawa and "Peasant Attitude to Governance" <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2009/12/sambawa-and-peasant-attitude-to.html>
6. Adverbial and Adjectival Abuse in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2009/12/adverbial-and-adjectival-abuse-in.html>
7. In Defense of "Flashing" and Other Nigerianisms <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/01/in-defense-of-flashing-and-other.html>
8. Weird Words We're Wedded to in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/01/weird-words-were-wedded-to-in-nigerian.html>
9. American English or British English? <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/01/american-english-or-british-english.html>
10. Hypercorrection in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/02/hypercorrection-in-nigerian-english.html>
11. Nigerianisms, Americanisms, Briticisms and Communication Breakdown <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/02/nigerianisms-americanisms-briticisms.html>
12. Top 10 Irritating Errors in American English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/03/top-10-irritating-errors-in-american.html>
13. Nigerian Editors Killing Macebuh Twice with Bad Grammar <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/03/nigerian-editors-killing-macebuh-twice.html>
14. On "Metaphors" and "Puns" in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/04/on-metaphors-and-puns-in-nigerian-media.html>
15. Common Errors of Pluralization in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/04/common-errors-of-pluralization-in.html>
<http://www.blogger.com/goog_704080340> 16. Q & A About Common Grammatical Problems <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/04/q-and-about-common-grammatical-problems.html>
<http://www.blogger.com/goog_704080340> 17. Semantic Change and the Politics of English Pronunciation <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/04/semantic-change-and-politics-of-english.html>
18. Common Errors of Reported Speech in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/05/common-errors-of-reported-speech-in.html>
19. Broken English, Pidgin English and Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/05/broken-english-pidgin-english-and.html>
20. Top Cutest and Strangest Nigerian English Idioms <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/06/top-cutest-and-strangest-nigerian.html>
21. Back-formation and Affixation in Nigerian English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/07/back-formation-and-affixation-in.html>
22. The Politics of Usage and Meaning in English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/08/politics-of-meaning-and-usage-in.html>
23. When Food and Grammar Mix <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/08/when-food-and-grammar-mix.html>
24. Q and A on Grammar <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/09/q-and-on-grammar.html>
25. The African Origins of Common English Words <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/09/african-origins-of-common-english-words.html>
26. Reader Feedback and My Responses <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/09/reader-feedback-and-my-responses.html>
27. Top 10 Oxymoronic Expressions in English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/10/top-10-oxymoronic-expressions-in.html>
28. The Grammar of Titles and Naming in International English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/10/grammar-of-titles-and-naming-in.html>
29. Q and A on Nigerian English Usage <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/10/q-and-on-nigerian-english-usage.html>
30. Comparing the Vernaculars of American and British Universities <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/11/comparing-vernaculars-of-american-and.html>
31. Ebonics and Neologisms in American English <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2010/12/neologisms-and-ebonics-in-american.html>
32. Patience Jonathan's Peculiar Grammar <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2011/03/patience-jonathans-peculiar-grammar.html>
33. Top 10 Words Nigerians Commonly Misspell <http://farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/2011/04/top-10-words-nigerians-commonly.html>
1 Park Place South
Suite 817C
Atlanta, GA, USA.
30303
Cell: (+1) 404-573-9697
Blog: www.farooqkperogi.blogspot.com <http://www.farooqkperogi.blogspot.com/>
"The nice thing about pessimism is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised." G. F. Will
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment