It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
But to the poster who said Californian is the "American accent", I would say that the SoCal accent (i.e. Jesse James) is totally foreign to what I would expect as non-regional. They say "so" like "sew". Weird.
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
But to the poster who said Californian is the "American accent", I would say that the SoCal accent (i.e. Jesse James) is totally foreign to what I would expect as non-regional. They say "so" like "sew". Weird.
Being born and bred in SOCA.
What is the difference between "so" and "sew".
Originally posted by Annee
Being born and bred in SOCA.
What is the difference between "so" and "sew".
Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
I didn't know how to write it, but I hear it more like "Sue" than Soh.
Originally posted by WickettheRabbit
reply to post by Annee
Think Valley Girl by Frank Zappa. Not necessarily the words, but the inflection and pronunciation.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Annee
Has the pronounciation "warsh" been mentioned yet? (For "wash", and "Washington")
My Mom says it that way (she born and raised in SoCal...but her Mom from Ohio?)
Here in DC, listening to NPR and Dianne Rheem, SHE says "Warshington" too....
Southern mountain dialect (as the folk speech of Appalachia is called by linguists) is certainly archaic, but the general historical period it represents can be narrowed down to the days of the first Queen Elizabeth, and can be further particularized by saying that what is heard today is actually a sort of Scottish-flavored Elizabethan English. This is not to say that Chaucerian forms will not be heard in everyday use, and even an occasional Anglo-Saxon one as well.
Originally posted by nixie_nox
Southern mountain dialect (as the folk speech of Appalachia is called by linguists) is certainly archaic, but the general historical period it represents can be narrowed down to the days of the first Queen Elizabeth, and can be further particularized by saying that what is heard today is actually a sort of Scottish-flavored Elizabethan English. This is not to say that Chaucerian forms will not be heard in everyday use, and even an occasional Anglo-Saxon one as well.
linky