Thus it is unsafe, here as elsewhere, to generalize too facilely, and

particularly unsafe to exhibit causes with too much assurance. "Man

frage nicht warum," says Philipp Karl Buttmann. "Der Sprachgebrauch

lässt sich nur beobachten."[80] But the greater distinctness of

American utterance, whatever its genesis and machinery, is palpable

enough in many familiar situations. "The typical American accent,"

says Vizetelly, "is often harsh and unmusical, but it sounds all of

the letters to be sounded, and slurs, but does not distort, the

rest."[81] An American, for example, almost always sounds the first

/l/ in /fulfill/; an Englishman makes the first syllable /foo/. An

American sounds every syllable in /extraordinary/, /literary/,

/military/, /secretary/ and the other words of the /-ary/-group; an

Englishman never pronounces the /a/ of the penultimate syllable.

/Kindness/, with the /d/ silent, would attract notice in the United

States; in England, according to [Pg171] Jones,[82] the /d/ is "very

commonly, if not usually" omitted. /Often/, in America, commonly

retains a full /t/; in England it is actually and officially /offen/.

Let an American and an Englishman pronounce /program/ (/me/). Though

the Englishman retains the long form of the last syllable in writing,

he reduces it in speaking to a thick triple consonant, /grm/; the

American enunciates it clearly, rhyming it with /damn/. Or try the two

with any word ending in /-g/, say /sporting/ or /ripping/. Or with any

word having /r/ before a consonant, say /card/, /harbor/, /lord/ or

/preferred/. "The majority of Englishmen," says Menner, "certainly do

not pronounce the /r/ ...; just as certainly the majority of educated

Americans pronounce it distinctly."[83] Henry James, visiting the

United States after many years of residence in England, was much

harassed by this persistent /r/-sound, which seemed to him to resemble

"a sort of morose grinding of the back teeth."[84] So sensitive to it

did he become that he began to hear where it was actually

non-existent, save as an occasional barbarism, for example, in

/Cuba-r/, /vanilla-r/ and /California-r/. He put the blame for it, and

for various other departures from the strict canon of contemporary

English, upon "the American common school, the American newspaper, and

the American Dutchman and Dago." Unluckily for his case, the full

voicing of the /r/ came into American long before the appearance of

any of these influences. The early colonists, in fact, brought it with

them from England, and it still prevailed there in Dr. Johnson's day,

for he protested publicly against the "rough snarling sound" and led

the movement which finally resulted in its extinction.[85] Today,

extinct, it is mourned by English purists, and the Poet Laureate

denounces the clergy of the Established Church for saying "the /sawed/

of the /Laud/" instead of "the sword of the Lord."[86]

But even in the matter of elided consonants American is not always the

conservator. We cling to the /r/, we preserve the final [Pg172] /g/,

we give /nephew/ a clear /f/-sound instead of the clouded English

/v/-sound, and we boldly nationalize /trait/ and pronounce its final

/t/, but we drop the second /p/ from /pumpkin/ and change the /m/ to

/n/, we change the /ph/(=/f/)-sound to plain /p/ in /diphtheria/,

/diphthong/ and /naphtha/,[87] we relieve /rind/ of its final /d/,

and, in the complete sentence, we slaughter consonants by

assimilation. I have heard Englishmen say /brand-new/, but on American

lips it is almost invariably /bran-new/. So nearly universal is this

nasalization in the United States that certain American lexicographers

have sought to found the term upon /bran/ and not upon /brand/. Here

the national speech is powerfully influenced by Southern dialectical

variations, which in turn probably derive partly from French example

and partly from the linguistic limitations of the negro. The latter,

even after two hundred years, has great difficulties with our

consonants, and often drops them. A familiar anecdote well illustrates

his speech habit. On a train stopping at a small station in Georgia a

darkey threw up a window and yelled "Wah ee?" The reply from a black

on the platform was "Wah oo?" A Northerner aboard the train, puzzled

by this inarticulate dialogue, sought light from a Southern passenger,

who promptly translated the first question as "Where is he?" and the

second as "Where is who?" A recent viewer with alarm[88] argues that

this conspiracy against the consonants is spreading, and that English

printed words no longer represent the actual sounds of the American

language. "Like the French," he says, "we have a marked /liaison/--the

borrowing of a letter from the preceding word. We invite one another

to 'c'meer' (=come here) ... 'Hoo-zat?' (=who is that?) has as good a

/liaison/ as the French /vois avez/." This critic believes that

American tends to abandon /t/ for /d/, as in /Sadd'y/ (=Saturday) and

/siddup/ (=sit up), and to get rid of /h/, as in "ware-zee?" (=where

is he?). But here we invade the vulgar speech, which belongs to the

next chapter. [Pg173]

Among the vowels the most salient difference between English and

American pronunciation, of course, is marked off by the flat American

/a/. This flat /a/, as we have seen, has been under attack at home for

nearly a century. The New Englanders, very sensitive to English

example, substitute a broad /a/ that is even broader than the English,

and an /a/ of the same sort survives in the South in a few words,

/e. g./, /master/, /tomato/ and /tassel/, but everywhere else in the

country the flat /a/ prevails. Fashion and the example of the stage

oppose it,[89] and it is under the ban of an active wing of

schoolmasters, but it will not down. To the average American, indeed,

the broad /a/ is a banner of affectation, and he associates it

unpleasantly with spats, Harvard, male tea-drinking, wrist watches and

all the other objects of his social suspicion. He gets the flat sound,

not only into such words as /last/, /calf/, /dance/ and /pastor/, but

even into /piano/ and /drama/. /Drama/ is sometimes /drayma/ west of

Connecticut, but almost never /drahma/ or /drawma/. /Tomato/ with the

/a/ of /bat/, may sometimes borrow the /a/ of /plate/, but /tomahto/

is confined to New England and the South. /Hurrah/, in American, has

also borrowed the /a/ of /plate/; one hears /hurray/ much oftener than

/hurraw/. Even /amen/ frequently shows that /a/, though not when sung.

Curiously enough, it is displaced in /patent/ by the true flat /a/.

The English rhyme the first syllable of the word with /rate/; in

America it always rhymes with /rat/.

The broad /a/ is not only almost extinct outside of New England; it

begins to show signs of decay even there. At all events, it has

gradually disappeared from many words, and is measurably less sonorous

in those in which it survives than it used to be. A century ago it

appeared, not only in /dance/, /aunt/, /glass/, /past/, etc., but also

in /Daniel/, /imagine/, /rational/ and /travel/.[90] And in 1857

Oliver Wendell Holmes reported it in /matter/, /handsome/,

/caterpillar/, /apple/ and /satisfaction/. It has been displaced in

virtually all of these, even in the most remote reaches of the back

country, [Pg174] by the national flat /a/. Grandgent[91] says that

the broad /a/ is now restricted in New England to the following

situations:

1. when followed by /s/ or /ns/, as in /last/ and /dance/.

2. when followed by /r/ preceding another consonant, as in /cart/.

3. when followed by /lm/, as in /calm/.

4. when followed by /f/, /s/ or /th/, as in /laugh/, /pass/ and

/path/.

The /u/-sound also shows certain differences between English and

American usage. The English reduce the last syllable of /figure/ to

/ger/; the educated American preserves the /u/-sound as in /nature/.

The English make the first syllable of /courteous/ rhyme with /fort/;

the American standard rhymes it with /hurt/. The English give an

/oo/-sound to the /u/ of /brusque/; in America the word commonly

rhymes with /tusk/. A /u/-sound, as everyone knows, gets into the

American pronunciation of /clerk/, by analogy with /insert/; the

English cling to a broad /a/-sound, by analogy with /hearth/. Even the

latter, in the United States, is often pronounced to rhyme with

/dearth/. The American, in general, is much less careful than the

Englishman to preserve the shadowy /y/-sound before /u/ in words of

the /duke/-class. He retains it in /few/, but surely not in /new/. Nor

in /duke/, /blue/, /stew/, /due/, /duty/ and /true/. Nor even in

/Tuesday/. Purists often attack the simple /oo/-sound. In 1912, for

example, the Department of Education of New York City warned all the

municipal high-school teachers to combat it.[92] But it is doubtful

that one pupil in a hundred was thereby induced to insert the /y/ in

/induced/. Finally there is /lieutenant/. The Englishman pronounces

the first syllable /left/; the American invariably makes it /loot/.

White says that the prevailing American pronunciation is relatively

recent. "I never heard it," he reports, "in my boyhood."[93] He was

born in New York in 1821.

The /i/-sound presents several curious differences. The English make

it long in all words of the /hostile/-class; in America it is commonly

short, even in /puerile/. The English also lengthen it in /sliver/; in

America the word usually rhymes with /liver/. The [Pg175] short /i/,

in England, is almost universally substituted for the /e/ in /pretty/,

and this pronunciation is also inculcated in most American schools,

but I often hear an unmistakable /e/-sound in the United States,

making the first syllable rhyme with /bet/. Contrariwise, most

Americans put the short /i/ into /been/, making it rhyme with /sin/.

In England it shows a long /e/-sound, as in /seen/. A recent poem by

an English poet makes the word rhyme with /submarine/, /queen/ and

/unseen/.[94] The /o/-sound, in American, tends to convert itself into

an /aw/-sound. /Cog/ still retains a pure /o/, but one seldom hears it

in /log/ or /dog/. Henry James denounces this "flatly-drawling group"

in "The Question of Our Speech,"[95] and cites /gawd/, /dawg/,

/sawft/, /lawft/, /gawne/, /lawst/ and /frawst/ as horrible examples.

But the English themselves are not guiltless of the same fault. Many

of the accusations that James levels at American, in truth, are echoed

by Robert Bridges in "A Tract on the Present State of English

Pronunciation." Both spend themselves upon opposing what, at bottom,

are probably natural and inevitable movements--for example, the

gradual decay of all the vowels to one of neutral color, represented

by the /e/ of /danger/, the /u/ of /suggest/, the second /o/ of

/common/ and the /a/ of /prevalent/. This decay shows itself in many

languages. In both English and High German, during their middle

periods, all the terminal vowels degenerated to /e/--now sunk to the

aforesaid neutral vowel in many German words, and expunged from

English altogether. The same sound is encountered in languages so

widely differing otherwise as Arabic, French and Swedish. "Its

existence," says Sayce, "is a sign of age and decay; meaning has

become more important than outward form, and the educated intelligence

no longer demands a clear pronunciation in order to understand what is

said."[96]

All these differences between English and American pronunciation,

separately considered, seem slight, but in the aggregate they are

sufficient to place serious impediments between mutual [Pg176]

comprehension. Let an Englishman and an American (not of New England)

speak a quite ordinary sentence, "My aunt can't answer for my dancing

the lancers even passably," and at once the gap separating the two

pronunciations will be manifest. Here only the /a/ is involved. Add a

dozen everyday words--/military/, /schedule/, /trait/, /hostile/,

/been/, /lieutenant/, /patent/, /nephew/, /secretary/, /advertisement/,

and so on--and the strangeness of one to the other is augmented. "Every

Englishman visiting the States for the first time," said an English

dramatist some time ago, "has a difficulty in making himself understood.

He often has to repeat a remark or a request two or three times to make

his meaning clear, especially on railroads, in hotels and at bars. The

American visiting England for the first time has the same trouble."[97]

Despite the fact that American actors imitate English pronunciation to

the best of their skill, this visiting Englishman asserted that the

average American audience is incapable of understanding a genuinely

English company, at least "when the speeches are rattled off in

conversational style." When he presented one of his own plays with an

English company, he said, many American acquaintances, after witnessing

the performance, asked him to lend them the manuscript, "that they might

visit it again with some understanding of the dialogue."[98]

FOOTNOTES:

[1] In Passing English of the Victorian Era; London, n. d., p. 68.

[2] The Oxford Dictionary, following the late J. H. Trumbull, the

well-known authority on Indian languages, derives the word from the

Algonquin /cau-cau-as-u/, one who advises. But most other authorities,

following Pickering, derive it from /caulkers/. The first caucuses, it

would appear, were held in a caulkers' shop in Boston, and were called

/caulkers' meetings/. The Rev. William Gordon, in his History of the

Rise and Independence of the United States, Including the Late War,

published in London in 1788, said that "more than fifty years ago Mr.

Samuel Adams' father and twenty others, one or two from the north end

of the town [Boston], where the ship business is carried on, used to

meet, make a /caucus/, and lay their plans for introducing certain

persons into places of trust and power."

[3] Americanisms Old and New; p. vii.

[4] A. Cleveland Coxe: Americanisms in England, /Forum/, Oct. 1886.

[5] Reprinted, in part, in the /New York Sun/, May 12, 1918.

[6] Vol. xiv. pp. 507, 512.

[7] In this connection it is curious to note that, though the raccoon

is an animal quite unknown in England, there was, until lately, a

destroyer called the /Raccoon/ in the British Navy. This ship was lost

with all hands off the Irish coast, Jan. 9, 1918.

[8] The Unexpurgated Case Against Woman Suffrage; London, 1913, p. 9.

/To bluff/ has also gone into other languages, notably the Spanish.

During the Cuban revolution of March, 1917, the newspapers of Havana,

objecting to the dispatches sent out by American correspondents,

denounced the latter as /los blofistas/. Meanwhile, /to bluff/ has

been shouldered out in the country of its origin, at least

temporarily, by a verb borrowed from the French, /to camouflage/. This

first appeared in the Spring of 1917.

[9] Book iv, ch. iii. The first of the six volumes was published in

1858 and the last in 1865.

[10] Words and Their Use, new ed.; New York, 1876, p. 198.

[11] Boston, 1918, pp. 1-43.

[12] /Green Book Magazine/, Nov., 1913, p. 768.

[13] An interesting note on this characteristic is in College Words

and Phrases, by Eugene H. Babbitt, /Dialect Notes/, vol. ii, pt. i, p.

11.

[14] America's Coming of Age; p. 15.

[15] March 26, 1918, pp. 4376-7.

[16] Jan. 14, 1918, p. 903.

[17] Mr. Campbell, of Kansas, in the House, Jan. 19, 1918, p. 1134.

[18] Mr. Hamlin, of Missouri, in the House, Jan. 19, 1918, p. 1154.

[19] Mr. Kirby, of Arkansas, in the Senate, Jan. 24, 1918, p. 1291;

Mr. Lewis, of Illinois, in the Senate, June 6, 1918, p. 8024.

[20] Mr. Weeks of Massachusetts, in the Senate, Jan. 17, 1918, p. 988.

[21] Mr. Smith, of South Carolina, in the Senate, Jan. 17, 1918, p.

991.

[22] Mr. Borland, of Missouri, in the House, Jan. 29, 1918, p. 1501.

[23] May 4, 1917, p. 1853.

[24] Mr. Snyder, of New York, Dec. 11, 1917.

[25] /Balled-up/ and its verb, /to ball up/, were originally somewhat

improper, no doubt on account of the slang significance of /ball/, but

of late they have made steady progress toward polite acceptance.

[26] After the passage of the first War Revenue Act cigar-boxes began

to bear this inscription: "The contents of this box have been /taxed

paid/ as cigars of Class B as indicated by the Internal Revenue stamp

affixed." Even /tax-paid/, which was later substituted, is obviously

better than this clumsy double inflection.

[27] Mr. Bankhead, of Alabama, in the Senate, May 14, 1918, p. 6995.

[28] /Bust/ seems to be driving out /burst/ completely when used

figuratively. Even in a literal sense it creeps into more or less

respectable usage. Thus I find "a /busted/ tire" in a speech by Gen.

Sherwood, of Ohio, in the House, Jan. 24, 1918. The familiar American

derivative, /buster/, as in /Buster Brown/, is unknown to the English.

[29] Pp. 133-154.

[30] L. Pearsall Smith, in The English Language, p. 29, says that "the

differentiation is ... so complicated that it can hardly be mastered

by those born in parts of the British Islands in which it has not yet

been established"--/e. g./, all of Ireland and most of Scotland.

[31] Quoted by White, in Words and Their Uses, pp. 264-5. White,

however, dissented vigorously and devoted 10 pages to explaining the

difference between the two auxiliaries. Most of the other authorities

of the time were also against Marsh--for example, Richard Meade Bache

(See his Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech, p. 92 /et seq./). Sir

Edmund Head, governor-general of Canada from 1854 to 1861, wrote a

whole book upon the subject: /Shall/ and /Will/, or Two Chapters on

Future Auxiliary Verbs; London, 1856.

[32] The probable influence of Irish immigration upon the American

usage is not to be overlooked. Joyce says flatly (English As We Speak

It in Ireland, p. 77) that, "like many another Irish idiom this is

also found in American society chiefly through the influence of the

Irish." At all events, the Irish example must have reinforced it. In

Ireland "/Will/ I light the fire, ma'am?" is colloquially sound.

[33] Often with such amusing results as "/whom/ is your father?" and

"/whom/ spoke to me?" The exposure of excesses of that sort always

attracts the wits, especially Franklin P. Adams.

[34] "It is /I/" is quite as unsound historically. The correct form

would be "it /am/ I" or "I am it." Compare the German: "ich /bin/ es,"

not, "es /ist/ ich."

[35] A common direction to motormen and locomotive engineers. The

English form is "slow down." I note, however, that "drive slow/ly/" is

in the taxicab shed at the Pennsylvania Station, in New York.

[36] I quote from a speech made by Senator Sherman, of Illinois, in

the United States Senate on June 20, 1918. /Vide/ /Congressional

Record/ for that day, p. 8743. Two days later, "There is no question

/but/ that" appeared in a letter by John Lee Coulter, A.M., Ph.D.,

dean of West Virginia University. It was read into the /Record/ of

June 22 by Mr. Ashwell, one of the Louisiana representatives. Even the

pedantic Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, oozing Harvard from every pore,

uses /but that/. /Vide/ the /Record/ for May 14, 1918, p. 6996.

[37] June 15, 1918, p. 62.

[38] The English Language, p. 79.

[39] This phrase, of course, is a Briticism, and seldom used in

America. The American form is "to take a matter up."

[40] P. 30.

[41] A Contribution /Towards/, etc., by Prof. H. Tallichet, vol. 1,

pt. iv.

[42] /Yale Review/, April, 1918, p. 545.

[43] I Speak United States, /Saturday Review/, Sept. 22, 1894.

[44] Our Dictionaries, pp. 84-86.

[45] Should Language Be Abolished? by Harold Goddard, /Atlantic

Monthly/, July, 1918, p. 63.

[46] In Yiddish, /ish ka bibble/. The origin and meaning of the phrase

have been variously explained. The prevailing notion seems to be that

it is a Yiddish corruption of the German /nicht gefiedelt/ (=/not

fiddled/=/not flustered/). But this seems to me to be fanciful. To the

Jews /ish/ is obviously the first personal pronoun and /kaa/ probably

corruption of /kann/. As for /bibble/ I suspect that it is the

offspring of /bedibbert/ (=/embarrassed/, /intimidated/). The phrase

thus has an ironical meaning, /I should be embarrassed/, almost

precisely equivalent to /I should worry/.

[47] All of which, of course, are coming into American, along with

many other Yiddish words. These words tend to spread far beyond the

areas actually settled by Jews. Thus I find /mazuma/ in A Word-List

from Kansas, from the collectanea of Judge J. C. Ruppenthal, of

Russell, Kansas, /Dialect Notes/, vol. iv. pt. v, 1916, p. 322.

[48] Louise Pound: Domestication of the Suffix /-fest/, /Dialect

Notes/, vol. iv, pt. v, 1916. Dr. Pound, it should be mentioned, has

also printed a brief note on /-inski/. Her observation of American is

peculiarly alert and accurate.

[49] For example, see the /Congressional Record/ for April 3, 1918, p.

4928.

[50] /Paprika/ is in the Standard Dictionary, but I have been unable

to find it in any English dictionary. Another such word is /kimono/,

from the Japanese.

[51] /Cf./ Vogue Affixes in Present-Day Word-Coinage, by Louise Pound,

/Dialect Notes/, vol. v, pt. i, 1918. Dr. Pound ascribes the vogue of

/super-/ to German influences, and is inclined to think that /-dom/

may be helped by the German /-thum/.

[52] /Vide/ Pennsylvania Dutch, by S. S. Haldeman; Philadelphia, 1872.

Also, The Pennsylvania German Dialect, by M. D. Learned; Baltimore,

1889. Also Die Zukunft deutscher Bildung in Amerika, by O. E. Lessing,

/Monatshefte für deutsche Sprache und Pedagogik/, Dec., 1916. Also,

Where Do You Stand? by Herman Hagedorn; New York, 1918, pp. 106-7.

Also, On the German Dialect Spoken in the Valley of Virginia, by H. M.

Hays, /Dialect Notes/, vol. iii, pt. iv, 1908, pp. 263-78.

[53] /Vide/ Notes on American-Norwegian, by Nils Flaten, /Dialect

Notes/, vol. ii, 1900. Also, for similar corruptions, The Jersey Dutch

Dialect, by J. Dyneley Prince, /ibid./, vol. iii, pt. vi, 1910, pp.

461-84. Also, see under Hempl, Flom, Bibaud, Buies and A. M. Elliott

in the bibliography.

[54] For all these examples of American Yiddish I am indebted to the

kindness of Abraham Cahan, editor of the /Jewish Daily Forward/. Mr.

Cahan is not only editor of the chief Yiddish newspaper of the United

States, but also an extraordinarily competent writer of English, as

his novel, The Rise of David Levinsky, demonstrates.

[55] What Americans Talk in the Philippines, /American Review of

Reviews/, Aug., 1913.

[56] /Cf./ The English of the Lower Classes in New York City and

Vicinity, /Dialect Notes/, vol. i, pt. ix, 1896. It is curious to note

that the same corruption occurs in the Spanish spoken in Santo

Domingo. The Dominicans thus change /porque/ into /poique/. /Cf./

Santo Domingo, by Otto Schoenrich; New York, 1918, p. 172. See also

High School Circular No. 17, Dept. of Education, City of New York,

June 19, 1912, p. 6.

[57] The American People, 2 vols.; New York, 1909-11, vol. ii, pp.

449-50. For a discussion of this effect of contact with foreigners

upon a language see also Beach-la-Mar, by William Churchill;

Washington, 1911, p. 11 /et seq./

[58] /Vide/ Lounsbury: The Standard of Usage in English, pp. 65-7.

[59] For an exhaustive discussion of these formations /cf./ Clipped

Words, by Elizabeth Wittman, /Dialect Notes/, vol. iv, pt. ii, 1914.

[60] Americanisms Old and New, p. 1.

[61] /Cf./ Semi-Secret Abbreviations, by Percy W. Long, /Dialect

Notes/, vol. iv, pt. iii, 1915.

[62] The classical example is in a parliamentary announcement by Sir

Robert Peel: "When that question is made to me in a proper time, in a

proper place, under proper qualifications, and with proper motives, I

will hesitate long before I will refuse to take it into

consideration."

[63] /Cf./ On the Art of Writing, by Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch; p. 100

/et seq./

[64] This use of /tenderloin/ is ascribed to Alexander (alias

"Clubber") Williams, a New York police captain. /Vide/ the /New York

Sun/, July 11, 1913. Williams, in 1876, was transferred from an

obscure precinct to West Thirtieth Street. "I've been having chuck

steak ever since I've been on the force," he said, "and now I'm going

to have a bit of tenderloin." "The name," says the /Sun/, "has endured

more than a generation, moving with the changed amusement geography of

the city, and has been adopted in all parts of the country."

[65] /New York Evening Mail/, Feb. 2, 1918, p. 1.

[66] Horizons, by Francis Hackett; New York, 1918, p. 53.

The American Language A Preliminary Inquiry into the Development of English in the United States · 第 16 / 36 段